What happens when the Supreme Court changes the interpretation of the law under which a federal inmate was convicted, such that the person would be innocent under that new interpretation?...more
In This Issue. The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) issued a Risk Alert about the scope and content of examinations OCIE plans to conduct of various...more
At the end of the Supreme Court’s most recent term, the Court released its long-awaited ruling in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 2051 (June 20, 2019)—a case that could have carried...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) prohibits unsolicited calls, text messages and faxes; it’s a federal statute that provides for statutory damages between $500-$1,500 per violation. With the speed and ease (and...more
Congress enacted the Telephone Consumer Protection Act in 1992 to regulate how people communicate by phone and fax. The TCPA gave the Federal Communications Commission regulatory authority to issue rules expanding on the...more
In its long-awaited ruling addressing whether the Administrative Orders Review Act (Hobbs Act) requires district courts to accept the FCC's legal interpretations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the TCPA), the...more
TCPA litigators have been closely monitoring the U.S. Supreme Court's docket waiting for a ruling in the PDR Network case. At stake is what kind of judicial deference should be given to the FCC's interpretation of the...more
On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded for consideration to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit two preliminary questions antecedent to the main issue of whether federal district courts must defer to the Federal...more
In November 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court had granted certiorari in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., to decide whether the Hobbs Act required the district court to accept the Federal Communications...more
Are district courts prohibited in every instance from considering challenges to the Federal Communication Commission (“FCC”)’s interpretation of certain provisions in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act – or can district...more
In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal district court was not necessarily bound by the Federal Communications Commission’s prior interpretation of a federal statute over which the agency has...more
Dodging the question of whether the Hobbs Act requires a federal court to accept the 2006 Federal Communication Commission (FCC) Order that provides the legal interpretation for the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA),...more
On June 20, 2019, the Supreme Court released its long-awaited decision in PDR v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic. The Court was expected to provide greater clarity about the extent to which litigants can challenge the Federal...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more
It is a busy TCPA news day! The United States Supreme Court has released its decision in PDR Networks, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., a TCPA junk fax class action. The decision is available for download...more
Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court issued its decision in PDR Network, LLC, et al. v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc. At issue was whether a TCPA-defendant in a civil case may contest the Federal Communications...more
In a major win for providers that serve a disproportionate share of indigent patients, the Supreme Court today upheld the D.C. Circuit’s earlier decision invalidating CMS’s policy to treat beneficiaries enrolled in Part C...more
On January 15, 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Azar v. Allina Health Services, a prominent case involving a challenge by hospitals over when Medicare’s instructions to its contractors impact a “substantive...more
On January 15, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a hotly-contested case involving a challenge by hospitals over when Medicare’s instructions to its contractors impact a “substantive legal standard” and thus...more
Is the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or the government) required to engage in notice and comment rulemaking when it changes a requirement that has an important impact on hospitals' reimbursement? As we reported...more
As forecast in our June 12, 2015 blog post David Weil, Administrator of the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has released Administrator’s Interpretation (AI) No. 2015-1, entitled “The Application of the Fair...more
The automotive industry, as much as any industry operating in the United States, has a substantial federal regulatory burden, with an alphabet soup of agencies charged with regulating under the authority of an alphabet soup...more
Over the last three decades, federal agencies have increasingly used “interpretations” to “explain” what a formal regulation means, rather than to go through the more expensive, complicated and slow process of changing the...more
When federal agencies change their interpretive rules, they are exempt from the formal notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), says the Supreme Court in its recent ruling in...more
Federal agencies now have the authority to interpret their own rules. On March 9, 2015, in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n, No. 13-1041, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 9, 2015), the United States Supreme Court effectively gave...more