Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
NEW YORK — A Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel again held Dec. 10 that it lacked appellate jurisdiction to consider a Connecticut federal judge’s ruling that a toy company’s redesigned figurines still ran afoul of a preliminary injunction previously ordered in an intellectual property dispute with Lego A/S and affiliated Lego entities (collectively, Lego).
RALEIGH, N.C. — The U.S. Government on Dec. 10 filed a brief in North Carolina federal court arguing that the Plaintiff Leadership Group’s (PLG) motion to strike supplemental reports filed by a government expert in the Camp Lejeune water contamination litigation constitutes a sanction that is “disproportionate and severe” because the documents in question contain corrections that are contemplated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 10 heard oral arguments in a case between closed-end funds (CEFs) and a hedge fund, with the CEFs asking it to determine whether the CEFs violated the Investment Company Act of 1940 (ICA) and whether Congress intended there to be a private right of action in Section 47(b) of the ICA.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a dispute over a patent held by the International Business Machines Corp. related to single-sign-on (SSO) technology with Zillow Group Inc. and a related entity, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Panel affirmed U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) findings that some claims in the patent were invalid while others were not, rejecting arguments from both parties.
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Two days after the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denied a pro se litigant’s petitions for writs of mandamus in a dispute involving long-term disability (LTD) benefits, an Ohio federal judge on Dec. 10 issued an amended ruling designating him a vexatious litigant, dismissing his case without prejudice and imposing sanctions including a $1,500 penalty and a three-part filing restriction, highlighting “his repeated failure to appear” and “his (apparently ongoing) use of AI resulting in fabricated citations.”
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Three companies that send child support payments to recipients filed a notice of appeal in California federal court on Dec. 9 stating they are appealing the court’s $7.6 million restitution award against them in favor of a certified class of child support recipients, who the court found were charged 50-cent service fees for making customer support phone calls in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL).
FORT MYERS, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida on Dec. 9 granted an insurer’s motion to dismiss insureds’ lawsuit seeking full coverage for their flood damage caused by Hurricane Ian, concluding that the lawsuit is time-barred.
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority on Dec. 9 reversed a lower federal court’s order that granted a homeowners insurer’s motion for judgment as a matter of law in its declaratory judgment lawsuit arising from a spinal cord injury that occurred at its insureds’ home, ruling there was a legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a jury to determine that the spinal injury did not arise out of the use of a controlled substance and, therefore, the policy’s controlled substance exclusion does not bar coverage.
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — A Florida state judge declared a mistrial after jurors indicated that they could not reach a unanimous verdict after deliberating for weeks in a case brought by Florida hospitals accusing pharmacies of contributing to the opioid crisis through their company policies.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 9 reversed a decision from the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) rejecting a coffee company’s application for a trademark on the name “Kahwa” as the name of coffee shops; the panel said there was no evidence in the record that the word for a type of tea would be understood by customers as a generic term for coffee shops.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Saying that now is the time for the U.S. Supreme Court to address a question it has thrice declined to consider — and acknowledging that the position it now takes represents a change from its historical one — the U.S. government on Dec. 9 filed an amicus curiae brief urging the high court to grant a certiorari petition that asks whether “burden-shifting applies to the element of causation under” part of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.