JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Easily Make Simple Words Complicated
Bill on Bankruptcy: ResCap Report, a Bargain at $83 Million
As Expected, Noel Canning v. NLRB Headed to the Supreme Court
Bill on Bankruptcy: How Purchasers of AMR Stock Made a Killing
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Labcorp v. Davis (No. 24-304), a case that arrived at the Court to resolve a fundamental question: "[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule...more
Chavez v. Plan Benefit Services, Inc., 108 F.4th 297 (5th Cir. 2024), began when three employees of a single employer sued the service providers of their health and welfare benefit plan for allegedly charging excessive fees...more
The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear a case concerning a self-appointed “tester’s” standing to bring claims alleging a hotel violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to provide...more
A recent case out of the Eastern District of California addressed the split in authority on whether an inaccurate credit report alone is enough to establish a concrete injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing. ...more
In Tsao v. Captiva MVP Rest. Partners, LLC, No. 18-14959, 2021 WL 381948 (11th Cir. Feb. 4, 2021), Tsao brought a putative class action against PDQ - a restaurant chain that he purportedly patronized - following a data...more
Interpreting Bristol-Myers : Are Unnamed Members of Nationwide Class Actions ‘Parties’? If So, When? In 2017, the Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California (BMS), holding that a...more
On May 5, 2020, the Seventh Circuit held that allegations that a defendant violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) by collecting a biometric information without first obtaining informed consent...more
On December 16, 2019, the Supreme Court denied DISH Network’s petition for certiorari seeking to overturn a $61 million judgment for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) violations based on telemarking calls made to...more
On October 4, the Eleventh Circuit agreed to review en banc a panel decision holding that a consumer’s heightened risk of identity theft is enough to establish Article III standing. Named plaintiff David Muransky filed a...more
“The chirp, buzz, or blink of a cell phone receiving a single text message is more akin to walking down a busy sidewalk and having a flyer briefly waved in one’s face. Annoying, perhaps, but not a basis for invoking the...more
On August 28, the Eleventh Circuit held that receiving one unsolicited text message is not a concrete injury that establishes Article III standing under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). The opinion creates a...more
The Eleventh Circuit, in Salcedo v. Hanna, has concluded that receipt of a single unsolicited text, allegedly sent in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the "TCPA"), does not constitute a sufficient "concrete...more
On August 8, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit again weighed in on Article III standing. Unlike its previous ventures into standing, however, it did so this time in the context of the Illinois...more
The past 18 months have been a (relatively) wild time for the False Claims Act - on the books since 1863. In FY2018 the Department of Justice obtained more than $2.8 billion in settlements and judgments from cases involving...more
On June 21, 2019, the D.C. Circuit split with several other circuits in holding that alleging a heightened risk of identity theft following a data breach is enough to establish standing at the pleadings stage....more
On April 22, 2019, the Eleventh Circuit held in Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc. that a plaintiff who claimed to have suffered a heightened risk of identity theft when the defendant printed a receipt containing too many...more
We wrote recently about how the certiorari petition in Zappos.com, Inc. v. Stevens was a possible vehicle to put the question of standing in data breach cases back before the Supreme Court. Alas, the Court denied the...more
Putative class action claims often have the potential to reach individuals across state lines, therefore invoking multiple state laws. This can be an obstacle to class certification. Say a plaintiff files a lawsuit against a...more
Welcome to Splitsville. As courts continue to address the definition of automated telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) within the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) it was only a matter of time before we started...more
On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in Spokeo v. Robins – bringing an end to an appellate saga that started in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals before heading up to...more
On August 15, 2017, the 9th Circuit, in Thomas Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., reversed the district court’s dismissal of an action alleging willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. The 9th...more
This same time last year, many in the business community were eagerly anticipating the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, which was to decide the standard that should be applied to determine whether...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has made it more difficult to establish Article III standing in data breach cases both at the pleading stage and at summary judgment by requiring plaintiffs to allege and show...more
A common and understandable concern of companies that suffer a data breach is whether the victims can sue the company. It is tempting to assume that the victims won’t sue if they do not suffer identity theft or monetary loss...more
On October 5, 2016, two district courts came to opposite conclusions on whether putative class action plaintiffs had standing to bring claims based on prospective employers’ failure to comply with Fair Credit Reporting Act...more