CHARLESTON, S.C. — A South Carolina federal judge granted partial summary judgment to several community groups and cities on remand, finding that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to terminate a series of environmental grants that aimed to help disadvantaged communities address climate challenges and ongoing pollution was unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and vacating “guidance documents” that shut down the grant program.

HONOLULU — A federal magistrate judge in Hawaii on June 12 recommended approval of the U.S. government’s petition for a good faith determination of a settlement with 367 plaintiffs for amounts ranging from $5,000 to $27,000 in two consolidated lawsuits related to groundwater contamination from a jet fuel spill at the Pearl Harbor Naval Base. The same day, the plaintiffs filed a response in support of the government’s petition, and nonsettling parties filed a statement incorporating their prior brief filed in opposition to a separate-but-related settlement.

RICHMOND, Va. — The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals vacated a lower federal court’s ruling in favor of a defendant insurer in a plaintiff insurer’s lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify a laboratory against an underlying lawsuit alleging that it used improper collection and testing methods and reported false positive drug tests, holding that the underlying action is “related” to an earlier claim that triggers coverage under the plaintiff insurer’s professional liability insurance policy.

ATLANTA — Ruling on two appeals challenging lower federal courts’ rulings in favor of insurers in coverage disputes arising from the opioid epidemic, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 11 certified a question asking the Georgia and Florida supreme courts to decide whether the insurance policies at issue require the insurers to defend and/or indemnify their insureds against the underlying opioid lawsuits.

CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed the denial of a motion for attorney fees filed by a plaintiff’s lawyers after a settlement was reached and attorney fees awarded in a multidistrict litigation because a case management order and class counsel’s motion for attorney fees clearly stated that the plaintiff’s counsel could not seek an award for any pre-MDL time.

SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal magistrate judge on June 11 granted final approval to a settlement of class claims against a California company accused of deceptively marketing its domestic Japanese-style sake as originating in Japan in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), with the company agreeing to change its labels and the plaintiff’s attorneys awarded fees and costs totaling $645,000.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a win for Google LLC, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel reversed two final written decisions in which the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found that multiple claims in two patents related to using spoken words to wake up a sound-enabled device were invalid as anticipated or obvious by prior art; the panel held that PTAB lacked substantial evidence to support its finding that a prior art reference disclosed the claims at issue.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on June 11 affirmed a Texas federal judge’s dismissal of a patent holder’s infringement suit against Bank of America Corp. and a related entity with prejudice, holding that the banking entities’ password technology did not meet a properly construed claim limitation central to the patent at issue.