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
On August 16, 2024, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals weighed in on whether out-of-state plaintiffs must satisfy personal jurisdiction requirements to participate in a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act...more
In Cherry v. Dometic Corp., the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that, when addressing a motion for class certification, courts may consider whether the named plaintiff has demonstrated an administratively feasible...more
Earlier this week, the Eleventh Circuit joined the Second, Sixth, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits in rejecting administrative feasibility as a prerequisite to certification under Rule 23, deepening a split with the First, Third,...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
Last Wednesday, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court concluded that receipt of participant disclosures and notices does not constitute “actual knowledge” of fees, investment options, and other plan features. Actual knowledge is the...more
On August 16, the D.C. Circuit held in a high-profile antitrust MDL involving railroad shippers that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement because their expert’s damages model calculated...more
For years, the plaintiffs’ bar has crammed thousands of non-forum class members into a single action in order to more easily justify broader discovery requests, and to more quickly aggregate statutory damages. And many...more
The U.S. Supreme Court suddenly seems to have a little time on its hands. Or at least on its mind. In two different class action cases on its docket this week, the question at hand was timeliness....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
On September 26, 2018, Skadden hosted a webinar titled “US Supreme Court October 2018 Term.” Topics included some of the key business-related cases on the Supreme Court’s docket, including cases addressing antitrust, foreign...more
Last week the Sixth Circuit took a big step to extend its reputation as one of the most class-friendly circuits in the country. In Martin v. Behr Dayton Thermal Prods. LLC, Judge Jane Stranch, writing for a unanimous panel,...more
Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, No. 17-342, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Kagan, and Gorsuch joined. Justice Sotomayor filed...more
From the standpoint of class action practice, 2017 was as important for what did not happen as for what did. Here are some of the highlights and lowlights of the 2017 class action scorecard, with a look forward to how the...more
Most federal courts have found that Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure implicitly requires a showing that members of a proposed class are readily identifiable or “ascertainable” for a class to be certified. For...more
On July 7, in In re Petrobras Securities, the 2nd Circuit declined to adopt an independent “administrative feasibility” requirement for class certification under Rule 23. In so holding, the 2nd Circuit joined the 6th, 7th,...more
On July 7, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit offered significant guidance regarding the circuit’s class certification requirements in In re Petrobras Securities, No. 16-1914. In addressing an issue of...more
This is the 15th edition of The Class Action Chronicle, a quarterly publication that provides an analysis of class action trends, along with a summary of recent class certification and Class Action Fairness Act rulings. Our...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down its (by now) hotly discussed decision in Briseno v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., 844 F.3d 1121 (9th Cir. 2017), on January 3, 2017, holding there is no separate...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Third Circuit has shaken up long-standing precedent and created a split among the circuits, such that now employers should not only evaluate its employment decisions for the effect on individuals over...more
Manufacturers of containerboard and corrugated products have asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on a Circuit split concerning the impact of negotiated prices on class certification in antitrust cases brought under Section 1...more
On January 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to adopt “administrative feasibility” as an independent requirement for class certification. It held that Rule 23 does not require class counsel to show at the...more
Readers may recall our coverage in recent months of the challenge by Procter & Gamble (P&G) to an order certifying a multi-state consumer class in a case asserting that P&G falsely advertised its probiotic supplement Align....more
On February 27, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans. Justice Ginsburg authored the 6-3 majority opinion affirming the Ninth Circuit’s holding that a securities fraud...more
On November 5, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 1085, a securities class action, that concerned the ongoing question of what evidence is required...more