TYLER, Texas — A Texas federal judge has ordered a nationwide stay of the effective date of a new U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) rule that redefines and broadens who is an investment advice fiduciary under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, concluding in his July 25 ruling that the rule conflicts with ERISA by, among other things, “treating as fiduciaries those who engage in one-time recommendations to roll over assets from an ERISA plan to an IRA.”

SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge did not err in dismissing allegations of insider trading brought by two hedge funds against large investors in a satellite communications company, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held, agreeing with the lower court judge that the hedge funds failed to show that the investors possessed material nonpublic information about a meeting the company had with the Federal Communications Commission.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal trial court did not err in denying a motion for a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) because substantial evidence supported a jury’s finding that beverage can patents were anticipated by a previous patent, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel found July 25 in affirming the trial court’s judgment.

SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 24 said it was “guided . . . by the Supreme Court's recent decision on standing and the FDA's regulation of mifepristone in FDA v Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. 602 U.S. 367 (2024)” and denied a motion filed by Idaho and other anti-abortion states to intervene in a case involving federal regulations for the abortion drug mifepristone.

BISMARCK, N.D. — A federal judge in North Dakota on July 24 ruled in favor of an insured in a homeowners insurer’s declaratory judgment lawsuit disputing coverage for underlying property damage and personal injuries caused by a fireworks explosion, finding that the policy’s misrepresentation provision does not bar coverage because the insured did not willfully conceal or misrepresent any material facts regarding his use and storage of commercial fireworks at his Bismark property.

WASHINGTON, D.C. —Monsanto Co. on July 25 announced that it has retained plaintiff’s attorney Mark Lanier to be counsel of record in its lawsuit against companies that formerly purchased polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from Monsanto but that now refuse to defend or indemnify it in litigation pending throughout the country pertaining to alleged PCB contamination. The case is currently on appeal at the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals after a Missouri federal judge granted a motion to remand the case to Missouri state court.

COLUMBIA, S.C. — The majority of the South Carolina Supreme Court on July 24 affirmed an appellate court’s ruling in an asbestos coverage suit, agreeing with the lower court that the insurer was not prejudiced by its insured’s late notice of the underlying asbestos exposure lawsuit and that the insured’s untimely notice was not a breach of the contract.

SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on July 24 partly reversed a California federal judge’s grant of summary judgment in a trademark dispute between two candy distributors, holding that the judge erred in determining that the plaintiff distributor failed to properly notify the defendant distributor that its allegations included the use of the mark “CANDY-GRAM,” leading the judge to improperly analyze the genericness only of the mark “CANDYGRAM” without a hyphen.