JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Insurance Implications of the California Consumer Privacy Act
We have seen a noticeable uptick in lawsuits commenced by “copyright trolls” in recent years, including against businesses in the manufacturing space. The Supreme Court is currently considering a case that could have a...more
Joint Juice, according to its labelling and advertising, promoted “healthy and happy,” if not pain free, joints. A jury apparently thought it was closer to snake oil, finding the product’s marketing false, misleading, and...more
The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly declined to resolve a question that has sharply divided the Circuits: whether a class may be certified even though it contains uninjured members. See e.g., Tyson Foods, Inc. v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on March 30, 2021, in a case that will help clarify when an intangible, nonmonetary injury is sufficiently “concrete and particularized” to give rise to Article III standing. The...more
Today, the United States Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in Trans Union LLC v. Ramirez. At issue is an eight-figure judgment obtained by a certified class of consumers for statutory and punitive damages based on...more
Summer in Washington, D.C., is usually a quiet time. D.C.'s summer of 2020 has been anything but quiet, to put it mildly. While there are several existential pulls on our attention this season, we should still take a moment...more
The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous copyright decision in March 2019 with implications for anyone involved in a copyright dispute, as well as for marketers and brands that create and use copyrighted materials. In Fourth...more
On March 20, 2019, in Frank v. Gaos, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), the United States Supreme Court sidestepped a novel question regarding a cy pres class action settlement, instead remanding the case back to the lower courts with...more
Section 411(a) of the Copyright Act provides that “no civil action for infringement of . . . copyright . . . shall be instituted until . . . registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.” A...more
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Spokeo v. Robins, which held that federal plaintiffs alleging a statutory violation must have suffered a real, concrete injury in order to have Article III standing, many defendants...more
On September 14, 2016, defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) moved for summary judgment on plaintiff Tina Bellino’s putative class action complaint, which alleges that Chase violated New York state law by presenting...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
The Ninth Circuit has opined, again, on whether a statutory violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681, et seq.-–-by itself––constitutes a concrete injury for Article III standing purposes. Last...more
On August 15, 2017, in a much-anticipated opinion in a case that has drawn national attention in the past three years, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that an alleged violation of the Fair Credit...more
Dear Retail Clients and Friends, Many of you are likely familiar with the US Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. On the one-year anniversary of Spokeo, data shows that retailers’ chances of success in...more
Supreme Court Restricts the Extraterritorial Reach of U.S. Patent Law for Exported Goods - On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court in a landmark decision held that the supply of a single component of a multicomponent...more
Federal courts have varied widely in their interpretation of standing for plaintiffs in consumer protection class actions since last year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in Spokeo v. Robins , __ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 1540 (May 16,...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
Law360, New York (July 1, 2016, 12:12 PM ET) -- The U.S. Supreme Court made a big splash this year establishing a murky threshold for standing that has already been widely cited by both sides of the bar, while consumers...more
Last month, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13–1339 (May 16, 2016). Spokeo involved a lawsuit brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (FCRA). ...more
In an important victory for employers, the Supreme Court in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins held that a plaintiff does not have Article III standing to sue in federal court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and other federal...more
Last week, decisions by the United States Supreme Court and the Northern District of Georgia provided further guidance regarding the narrow path required for a class action plaintiff to successfully establish Article III...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Spokeo v. Robins, which posed the question of whether Article III standing requires a plaintiff to have a concrete injury when alleging a statutory violation under the...more
Plaintiffs must show they suffered from an actual injury, not just a “bare procedural violation,” in order to sue in federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in its long-awaited decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No....more
Earlier this week, by a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court issued a “no decision” decision on an issue important to employers facing class action litigation. The Court decided that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals needed to review...more