WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel found errors in a Maryland federal judge’s construction of disputed patent claims in a suit over patents covering atomizers for particulate paints, which led the panel in its March 20 opinion to reverse the judge’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in the defendant-appellee’s favor.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 20 consolidated a petition filed by 24 states, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands and a number of cities and counties challenging a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency final action published in the Federal Register that rescinded Obama-era greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution regulations for engines and vehicles with a similar petition filed by a myriad of environmental advocacy groups and multiple others over the EPA’s massive deregulatory action.

RICHMOND, Va. — The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 19 affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of an internet services provider’s Communications Act violation suit against T-Mobile alleging network interference, finding that the “claim is barred by that statute’s election-of-remedies provision” because the provider had already filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) did not err when it held that Apple Inc. violated the Tariff Act by importing and selling Apple Watch models that infringed blood oxygenation patents held by other technology entities, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held March 19.

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — A Tennessee federal judge who previously ordered further factual development in a suit over a long-term disability (LTD) claim that involves a mental illness limitation, pain and the headache condition occipital neuralgia on March 19 granted judgment on the administrative record, ruling on de novo review that the claimant was disabled under the policy’s any gainful occupation definition as of March 2021 and is entitled to continuing benefits.

DENVER — Noting that whether the complete defense rule applies in the context of title insurance is a matter of first impression in Colorado, a Colorado appeals panel on March 19 affirmed a lower court’s ruling that a title insurer has no duty to defend a trust under either the complete defense rule or the insurance policy against an underlying trespass and unjust enrichment lawsuit brought by a neighbor.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla.  —  In a hurricane coverage dispute, a Florida appellate court reversed and remanded a lower court order enforcing an insured’s settlement agreement with a now-insolvent insurer against the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA), which was substituted as a defendant after the insurer was placed into receivership, finding that the insured’s claim for attorney fees “does not fall within the statutory definition of a covered claim.”

TRENTON, N.J. — A panel of the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division affirmed a trial court’s judgment in favor of a homeowners insurer in a water damage coverage dispute after determining that the lower court did not err in allowing a jury to determine if the insurer breached its contract when it ceased payments for the repair of the insured’s condominium unit.