-
Unanimous Supreme Court Holds Random or Sequential Number Generation Required for Equipment to Constitute an Autodialer Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Facebook v. Duguid, No. 19-511 Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court held 9-0 that equipment must be capable of random or sequential number generation in order to qualify as an “automatic telephone dialing system” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Background: The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), among other things, restricts certain communications made […]
-
Supreme Court Holds Causal Connection To Forum State Not Required To Establish Specific Personal Jurisdiction
Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, No. 19-368 Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court held 8-0 that Ford’s contacts with Montana and Minnesota sufficed to support specific personal jurisdiction in those States’ courts over product-liability suits brought by residents of those States stemming from car accidents in the States. Background: There are two […]
-
Supreme Court Holds That FOIA Does Not Require Federal Agencies To Disclose Draft Biological Opinions
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service v. Sierra Club, Inc., No. 19-547 Introduction: In a 7-2 opinion issued today—the first opinion for the Court from Justice Barrett—the Supreme Court held that the Freedom of Information Act’s (FOIA) deliberative-process privilege protects from disclosure agencies’ in-house, draft biological opinions. Background: FOIA requires that federal agencies make records available to […]
-
“Domestic takings” Rule Bars Suit Against Foreign Nations in U.S. Court
Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp, No. 19-351; Republic of Hungary v. Simon, No. 18-1447 Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that the “domestic takings” rule bars suits against foreign governments for the unlawful taking of property from people who were nationals of the confiscating country at the time of the […]
-
Supreme Court Holds That Retaining Impounded Vehicles Does Not Violate Automatic Stay
Case Name and Number: Chicago v. Fulton, No. 19-357 Introduction: In an 8-0 opinion issued today, the Supreme Court held that a creditor’s passive retention of property properly seized from a debtor pre-bankruptcy does not violate the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3). Background: When an entity or individual files for bankruptcy, an automatic […]
-
Supreme Court Invalidates Debt-Related Provision Of The Telephone Consumer Protection Act Under The First Amendment
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc., No. 19-631 The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) prohibits most automated calls or texts to cell phones, but it makes an exception for calls or texts that seek to collect on U.S. government debts. Today, the Supreme Court held that this exception violates the First […]
-
Supreme Court Rules that “Booking.com” Is Eligible for Trademark Protection
Patent & Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V., No. 19-46 Today, the Supreme Court held by a vote of 8-1 that adding “.com” to an otherwise generic term (such as “booking” for hotel-booking services) may yield a non-generic name that is eligible for trademark protection, so long as consumers do not perceive the combined name (e.g., […]
-
Supreme Court Rules that CFPB’s Structure Is Unconstitutional, But CFPB May Continue to Operate
Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, No. 19-7 Today, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) violates the separation of powers, because the CFPB’s Director is not removable at will by the President, but that the removal restriction is severable from the other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. […]
-
Supreme Court Allows SEC to Seek Disgorgement of Profits for Victims of Securities Fraud in Civil Actions
Liu v. SEC, No. 18-1501 Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court held in an 8-1 decision that the SEC, in civil actions, can seek disgorgement of a defendant’s net profits from securities fraud. Background: Through an investment fund, Charles Liu and Xin Wang raised $27 million to build a cancer treatment center in California, but they spent […]
-
Supreme Court Thwarts Trump Administration’s Attempt to Dismantle DACA
DHS v. Regents of the University of California (No. 18-587); Trump v. NAACP (No. 18-588); Wolf v. Vidal (No. 18-589) Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court—in a 5-4 decision—invalidated the Trump Administration’s rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program, which provides protection against deportation and work authorization for 700,000 undocumented individuals who were […]
-
Supreme Court Rules That Title VII Prohibits Employers from Discriminating Against Employees on the Basis of Sexual Orientation or Transgender Status
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (No. 17-1618); Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda (No. 17-1623); R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (No. 18-107) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it “unlawful . . . for an employer . . . to discriminate against any individual . . . because […]
-
The Forest Service Retains Jurisdiction Over National Forest Lands Underlying the Appalachian Trail
United States Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association, Nos. 18-1584 & 18-1587 Today, the Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision preserved the authority of the Forest Service over national forest lands that are crossed by the Appalachian Trail. Under basic principles of statutory interpretation and the well-established law of easements, the Supreme Court rejected […]
-
Supreme Court Limits Article III Standing in ERISA Class Actions
Thole v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. 17-1712 In a 5-4 decision issued this morning, the Supreme Court held that participants in a pension plan lack Article III standing to pursue an ERISA fiduciary breach lawsuit if they cannot demonstrate that the lawsuit would alter their entitlement to benefits. Background: Two participants in the U.S. Bank […]
-
Supreme Court Rules Unanimously That New York Convention Allows Application of Domestic Equitable Estoppel Doctrines Authorizing Nonsignatories to Enforce Arbitration Agreements
GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC Today, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards (known as the New York Convention) permits application of domestic equitable estoppel doctrines to allow certain nonsignatories to arbitration agreements to compel arbitration against signatory parties. Background: […]
-
Supreme Court holds that Georgia cannot copyright the annotations to its laws
Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, No. 18-1150 Introduction: Today, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that Georgia cannot copyright the annotations in its official state code under the “government edicts” doctrine. Background: Every year, the Georgia Code Revision Commission assembles the State’s code, the official compilation of Georgia’s laws. The Commission hires LexisNexis, a private company, to prepare annotations, such as […]
-
Supreme Court Adopts Multifactor, Functional-Equivalent Standard to Determine When the Clean Water Act Requires a Permit for Discharges from a Point Source
County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, No. 18-260 Today, the Supreme Court reined in the Ninth Circuit’s broad standard requiring a permit under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) for all discharges to navigable water that are fairly traceable to a point source. The Court instead held that a permit is required only for discharges […]
-
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., No. 18-1233
Today, the Supreme Court held that plaintiffs in trademark-infringement actions need not prove that defendants acted willfully in order to recover defendants’ ill-gotten profits as damages. Although an infringer’s mental state is a factor a court should consider in awarding damages, proof of willfulness is not always required. Background: Romag sells magnetic snap fasteners for […]
-
Supreme Court Client Alert – Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Techs., No. 18-916
Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Techs., No. 18-916 Today, the Supreme Court made it more difficult to challenge decisions of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to institute inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. IPR allows challengers to have the PTO reexamine the validity of a holder’s patents. Institution of IPR is subject to a one-year […]
-
Supreme Court Holds That Landowners Seeking Restoration Damages in State Court Under State-Law Causes of Action Are “Potentially Responsible Parties” Under CERCLA Required to Seek EPA Approval for Remedial Action
Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, No. 17-1498 Today, the Supreme Court held that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) does not divest state courts of jurisdiction over state-law claims brought by landowners seeking restoration damages to their property within a CERCLA-designated Superfund site. But it further held that the landowners are potentially responsible […]
-
Supreme Court Holds That a Plaintiff Claiming Discrimination in Contracting Under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Must Plead and Prove “But-For” Causation
Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media, No. 18-1171 Today, the Supreme Court held unanimously that a plaintiff claiming race discrimination in contracting under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 bears the burden of pleading and proving that the defendant’s unlawful conduct was the “but for” cause of the plaintiff’s injury. The Court held that […]