PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Feb. 11 denied a motion to remand sought by former players and widows of former players for the Philadelphia Phillies baseball team who allege that the makers or suppliers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are liable for wrongful death and other harm due to the presence of PFAS in the artificial turf that was used for the surface of the baseball field in Veterans Stadium, the team’s former home stadium.  The judge said that 3M Co.’s removal of the case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute was “timely and proper.”

NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 11 denied a motion for an injunction of a new Mississippi vape directory law that will allegedly ban the sale of e-cigarettes containing synthetic nicotine pending an appeal by industry associations, a distributor and retailers of the dismissal of their lawsuit challenging the law, writing that the appellants lack standing because they allege a “generalized grievance” rather than a “constitutional injury.”

HOUSTON — A Texas federal judge opined in dismissing claims in a class action alleging violations of state insurance laws and breach of contract that the Texas Insurance Code does not prohibit cost-sharing between insurance companies and members for payment for diagnostic breast imaging and that an insurance company was not required to pay for the deductibles and coinsurance for the procedure for a woman and a class of other non-Employee Retirement Income Security Act policyholders.

VALDOSTA, Ga. — A federal judge in Georgia on Feb. 11 partially granted and partially denied Bayer Corp.’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a woman who claims that the company caused her to develop a neurological injury called stiff person’s syndrome (SPS), which she says is the result of her exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup.  The judge said the plaintiff pleaded facts sufficient to state claim for breach of a duty to warn but did not plead facts sufficient to state a claim for negligent recall.

PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge in Pennsylvania granted in part and denied in part insurers’ motions for summary judgment on the bellwether issues of claims-made requirement, batching and extended reporting; notice; occurrence requirement and fortuity-based exclusions; and prior knowledge in an opioid litigation coverage dispute brought by the trustee of a general unsecured creditors’ trust formed after the pharmaceutical company insured filed for bankruptcy, holding that all personal injury (PI) and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) claims first made after the 2016-17 policy period are not covered under the 2016-17 products insurance policies.

ST. LOUIS — A Missouri federal judge on Feb. 10 granted final approval to a $2.5 million nonreversionary class settlement resolving data privacy claims arising from Panera LLC’s 2024 data security breach involving unauthorized access to the names and Social Security numbers of the company’s employees, authorizing reimbursements of up to $500 in ordinary losses and up to $6,500 in extraordinary losses; following a separate data breach in January, Panera has been named as the defendant in a series of class complaints in the same court.

PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge on Feb. 10 denied a company and its affiliated dermatology practices’ motion for judgment on the pleadings or dismissal in a relator’s suit asserting violations of the False Claims Act (FCA) and similar state laws for the practices’ alleged fraudulent billing to receive higher reimbursements from government health insurers, finding that the FCA’s qui tam provisions “did not usurp the executive branch’s control of its enforcement priorities” and the relators’ suit “does not violate the Appointments, Vesting, and Take Care Clauses” of Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Federal government parties who are arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court that individuals stopped in Mexico before crossing into the United States can’t apply for asylum under 8 U.S. Code Section 1158(a)(1) or be inspected by immigration officers under 8 U.S. Code Section 1225(a) are ignoring “Congress’s use of the present tense—as well as the present progressive ‘arriving’ in nearby provisions,” a migrant support group and others argue in their Feb. 10 respondent brief; the federal government is challenging a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that partially upheld a permanent injunction in a class case over a now-rescinded border metering policy.