Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
SAN FRANCISCO — More than a year after a trial court approved the $725 million settlement of a consolidated class action over the 2015 sharing of Facebook users’ profiles with Cambridge Analytica, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 13 affirmed the approval over an appeal of the settlement and attorney fees amounts by two class members.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Comparing Elon Musk’s recent actions, accessing of sensitive data from federal agencies’ computer systems, to “the abuses of an 18th century monarch,” a group of 14 U.S. states filed a complaint on Feb. 13 in a District of Columbia federal court, claiming that the free reign given to Musk and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) violates the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its second appeal in as many days, the federal government on Feb. 13 filed an emergency motion in the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to stay a temporary restraining order (TRO) preventing the removal of Hampton Dellinger from his position as special counsel; Dellinger filed an opposition the same day arguing that like the first appeal, the appellate court lacks jurisdiction.
GREENBELT, Md. — The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its “de facto” administrator, Elon Musk, have exercised control over U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) systems and blocked USAID personnel access to those systems while “dismantling” the agency, 26 unnamed USAID workers allege in a Feb. 13 complaint filed in a federal court in Maryland in which they seek to enjoin “Musk and his DOGE subordinates from performing their significant and wide-ranging duties unless and until . . . Musk is properly appointed pursuant to the U.S. Constitution.”
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge in California concluded that an insurer has no duty to defend its furniture delivery company insured against an underlying misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition lawsuit brought by a competitor, granting the insurer’s motion for summary judgment in the insured’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A panel of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 13 reversed a finding by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that a synthetic diamond company’s patent was directed at ineligible abstract ideas, instructing the ITC to reconsider its resolution to a case brought by the company against entities it said imported materials that infringed the patent.
SHERMAN, Texas — A Texas federal judge on Feb. 12 denied summary judgment sought by small e-liquid makers and a vaping industry association that claimed that the Food and Drug Administration’s regulation of vaping is so “burdensome” that it effectively bars small companies from entering the market and granted the FDA’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
LONDON — A panel of the English Court of Appeal on Feb. 12 affirmed a lower court’s ruling that the doctrine of issue estoppel bars the Russian Federation from arguing it is immune from an action to enforce an arbitral award against it worth more than $50 billion because it never agreed to arbitrate, writing that the previous rejection of that argument by an appellate court in the jurisdiction where the award was issued has preclusive effect.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) applied an incorrect, overly narrow claim construction in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding brought by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and its American counterpart against the holder of a patent related to interactive device screens, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Feb. 12.
CINCINNATI — The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 12 briefly denied a petition for rehearing en banc that six amicus curiae entities supported in a combined brief; the 2-1 decision at issue revived an Employee Retirement Income Security Act suit over a retirement plan’s retention of the passively managed Northern Trust Focus Funds suite of target date funds (TDFs) and choice of share classes.
BOSTON — A federal judge in Massachusetts on Feb. 12 dissolved a temporary restraining order (TRO) previously entered in a case brought by unions representing federal workers and challenging the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) “deferred resignation” program, finding the unions lack standing and the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claims brought under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).