Supreme Court Holds SEC May Seek Disgorgement Without Showing Pecuniary Harm
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court on June 4 ruled that the Securities and Exchange Commission may seek equitable disgorgement under federal securities laws without showing that investors suffered pecuniary harm, saying that traditional equitable principles associated with disgorgement do not require a showing of pecuniary loss “before an investor qualifies as a victim of an offender’s wrongdoing entitled to compensation.”
Claims Collector Lacks Standing To Sue Insurer, Florida Panel Says In Reversal
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Florida appellate court panel held June 3 that an entity that purchases accounts receivable lacks standing to sue a homeowners insurer to recover payment for services related to the insured’s property damage to his home, reversing a lower court’s denial of the insurer’s motion for summary judgment and remanding for the lower court to enter judgment in favor of the insurer.
High Court Finds Drugmaker’s Inducement Claims Fail, Reverses Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court on June 4 held that a biopharmaceutical company failed to plausibly allege that a bioequivalent maker actively induced patent infringement after considering arguments on the standard of induced infringement in medical patent cases, including ones with “skinny label” generic versions. The high court determined that the patent owner relied on vague language and speculation to attempt to show that the bioequivalent maker induced infringement.
Split U.S. High Court Finds FCC Forfeiture Orders Do Not Violate 7th Amendment
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an 8-1 ruling issued June 4 by the U.S. Supreme Court in consolidated cases in which Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc. asserted constitutional challenges to the Federal Communications Commission’s enforcement of monetary forfeitures under the Communications Act, a majority held that the FCC’s forfeiture orders do not violate the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because the forfeiture proceedings do not resolve the parties’ legal obligations.
11th Circuit: Rapper’s Bankruptcy Means He Lost Copyright Termination Interest
ATLANTA — In a matter of first impression, an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held that a late rapper who was a member of hip-hop group 2 Live Crew lost ownership of copyright interests in the group’s earliest recordings to his bankruptcy estate upon declaring bankruptcy, reversing a Florida federal judge’s finding that the rapper maintained copyright interests.
$23M Deal Proposed To Settle ERISA Class Action Involving Mortality Tables
NEW YORK — In the wake of recent appellate rulings that revived three separate Employee Retirement Income Security Act cases similar to theirs, retirees who sued Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. and related defendants over the use of allegedly outdated mortality tables in calculating qualified joint and survivor annuity (QJSA) benefits moved in New York federal court for preliminary approval of a class settlement they say has a present value of $23 million.
9th Circuit Denies Insurer’s Petition For Rehearing In Contamination Coverage Suit
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 2 denied an umbrella insurer’s petition for panel or en banc rehearing in a dispute over the application of the policies’ annual aggregate limit provision to the insured’s environmental contamination remediation costs, declining to revisit its determination that the annual aggregate limit provision is ambiguous.
Judge Enters $255K Judgment For Smoker’s Estate Against Tobacco Company
MIAMI — A Florida state judge on June 2 entered final judgment in the amount of $255,000 in favor of a smoker’s estate and against a tobacco company, representing 51% of a jury’s verdict issued in the estate’s favor in an Engle trial based on comparative fault, leaving unresolved a motion by the tobacco company to apply a “setoff” to the judgment based on the estate’s prior settlements with two other tobacco companies.
Federal Circuit Agrees Patent Claims Are Abstract, But Vacates Judge’s Fee Finding
WASHINGTON, D.C. — While a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel said in a June 2 opinion that it agreed with a Nebraska federal judge’s finding that patents describing the sharing of farming data were directed at patent-ineligible abstract concepts, the panel also held that the judge failed to adequately explain why the case was not exceptional for the purpose of attorney fees under the Patent Act.
En Banc 9th Circuit Reverses Discovery Sanction That Ended Civil Forfeiture Case
SAN FRANCISCO — Issuing a June 2 en banc ruling featuring a partial concurrence, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a discovery sanction that struck a man’s claim to $1,106,775 that was seized from a vehicle he was driving and remanded for further proceedings, concluding that “the district court was operating in a difficult area that lacked extensive case law from this court” but under the circumstances it was an abuse of discretion to end the civil forfeiture case for allegedly insufficient responses to special interrogatories concerning standing.
Judge: Umbrella Insurer Has Duty To Defend Diocese Against Sexual Abuse Lawsuits
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal judge in California held that an umbrella insurer has a duty to defend the Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange against more than 200 underlying sexual abuse lawsuits brought under the California Child Victims Act, rejecting the insurer’s argument that the insolvency of the insured’s primary insurer does not obligate it to drop down in place of the primary insurer.