Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
On October 29, 2024, BabyBjörn AB (“BabyBjörn”) filed two separate petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,786,055 (“the ’055 Patent”), which is assigned to The ERGO Baby Carrier, Inc. (“ERGO Baby”). ...more
On May 14, 2025, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed into law Senate Bill 29 (“SB 29”), which significantly reforms the Texas Business Organizations Code (“TBOC”). With these reforms, Texas aims to create a legal environment...more
On May 7, 2025, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued a significant decision in Daly v. The Wonderful Company LLC, No. 24 C 1267 (N.D. Ill.). The court dismissed with prejudice a putative class...more
In our prior article, we discussed instances in which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the district courts made different findings with regard to patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. A recent...more
Excessive fee cases against plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) have been on the rise for the last decade. ERISA litigation is expanding with novel theories such as forfeiture litigation....more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Jones v. Ceinski - qualified immunity - Otto Candies v. Citigroup - RICO, fraud, conspiracy - Berrocal v. US Att’y Gen - standing, international treaty - Maglana v....more
Most uses of artificial intelligence in litigation carry great promise but little risk. That’s not the case with generative AI tools employed to draft legal pleadings. Despite the best efforts of courts and bar groups to...more
A recent decision out of the Eastern District of Virginia, Matthews v. Senior Life Ins. Co., provides a helpful reminder that TCPA complaints do not satisfy Rule 8’s pleading standard if they do not plausibly link the...more
Under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007 (April 17, 2025), plaintiffs asserting that ERISA plan administrators engaged in prohibited transactions under ERISA Section 406 are...more
In Cunningham v. Cornell University,1 the Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs who bring a prohibited transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) are only...more
by Alex Smith The Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding the pleading standards for ERISA prohibited transactions claims in a case involving Cornell’s 403(b) plan to resolve a federal circuit court split. Under...more
Many sponsors and fiduciaries of ERISA retirement plans had been hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Cunningham v. Cornell University (No. 23-1007) would articulate new pleading standards that would slow the...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the pleading requirements to bring a prohibited-transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) in Cunningham v....more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion, resolved a circuit split and established a plaintiff-friendly pleading standard for ERISA prohibited transaction claims in Cunningham v. Cornell University,...more
The US Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion that could lead to an increase in litigation for prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA)....more
In a unanimous ruling, the New York Court of Appeals held that the New York State Legislature did not alter the substantive pleading requirements of Section 11(b) of the Court of Claims Act (the “Act”) for claims brought...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 17, 2025, issued a greatly anticipated decision in which the justices unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging a prohibited transaction under Section 1106(a)(1)(C) of the Employee Retirement...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Cunningham v Cornell University, addressing the pleading standard applicable to prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that plaintiffs can satisfy the requirements for pleading prohibited party-in interest transactions under ERISA section 406(a) without...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on the appropriate pleading standard for a specific type of prohibited transaction claim under ERISA. While that decision may sound dry and technical, the...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion that has the potential to make it more difficult for defendants to have excess fee cases for 401(k) or 403(b) plans dismissed at an early stage of...more
Key takeaway: The Supreme Court held that to state an ERISA prohibited-transaction claim under 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a), a plaintiff needs only to plausibly allege the elements contained in § 1106(a) itself and does not need to...more
In a unanimous decision reversing dismissal of prohibited transaction claims based on fees paid to defined contribution plan recordkeepers, the Supreme Court held that ERISA’s prohibited transaction exemptions are affirmative...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007: This case addresses the pleading standard to assert a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement...more