Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 12 asked the Office of the U.S. Solicitor General to state the government’s position on a petition for a writ of certiorari that the court is considering on whether state unfair competition laws are preempted by federal law in cases accusing compounding pharmacies of marketing drugs without premarket approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a case echoing asbestos litigation, oil companies and Louisiana on Jan. 12 sparred during oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court over whether well drilling activities in the state were sufficiently related to World War II-era contracts involving the production of aviation gasoline to trigger federal jurisdiction under 2011 amendments to the federal officer removal statute.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A terminated multiemployer pension plan on Jan. 9 waived its right to respond to a certiorari petition filed on behalf of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) in which the U.S. solicitor general argues that the decision at issue “will likely result in the payment of hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to terminated pension plans that Congress intentionally excluded from” a special financial assistance (SFA) program and urges the U.S. Supreme Court to “grant review without awaiting the development of a circuit conflict.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Jan. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider whether provisions of the Communications Act, by which the Federal Communications Commission assesses and enforces the payment of monetary forfeitures, violate the Seventh Amendment or Article III of the U.S. Constitution, granting certiorari in cases involving former practices of AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. under which they sold customers’ location data to third parties.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) was correct to reject a man’s request to register trademarks based on the name of New York Yankees player Aaron Judge because the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) and Judge established they had priority of use, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held.
RICHMOND, Va. — Saying, “The magnitude of this case and these issues are hard to overstate,” the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) on Jan. 9 became the latest amicus curiae to urge the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a ruling that retirees had standing to file a putative class lawsuit that is part of a much-watched string of pension risk transfer (PRT) challenges; among other things, the retirees generally allege that the use of offshore captive reinsurers makes the insurers that are responsible to pay annuities because of the PRTs more likely to fall short of their obligations.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9 granted an individual’s petition for a writ of certiorari to determine whether the Securities and Exchange Commission is required to show that investors suffered pecuniary harm when asking for a disgorgement award.
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 8 affirmed a district court order granting Apple Inc.’s motion for summary judgment on claims that it violated federal antitrust law and California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by impairing a competitor’s heart rate tracking app tailored for the Apple Watch to monopolize the market, finding that Apple’s refusal to share algorithm data with third-party app developers was considered a “refusal to deal” and the competitor failed to show an exception to the antitrust principle that there is no duty to deal.
BOISE, Idaho — The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment issued in favor of property owners, holding that a state statute prohibits a homeowners association from enforcing a short-term rental restriction adopted without the property owners’ express written consent and rejecting the association’s argument that the restriction later bound subsequent purchasers; the Idaho high court also declined to award attorney fees to either party after determining the appeal raised an issue of first impression and was not frivolous.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) did not abuse its discretion by granting a limited exclusion order (LEO) and not a general exclusion order (GEO) to Crocs Inc. against defaulting respondents the company accused of importing products that infringed or diluted trademarks related to its shoes, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held Jan. 8.
PHOENIX — An expert retained by a plaintiff in a product liability case to prove causation was properly excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 after the district court judge found his testimony to be unreliable, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Jan. 8, affirming a summary judgment award for the manufacturer of a portable camping fire device.