Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A split U.S. Supreme Court ruled June 18 that Texas and the owner of hundreds of acres of land near the proposed site of a planned interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel in west Texas are not “parties aggrieved” under the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and elements of the Hobbs Act in determining that they were not eligible to obtain judicial review in the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals of a license issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for construction of the facility.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18 vacated a ruling by the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals declining to transfer to the District of Columbia Circuit a case involving oil refineries’ challenges to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s denial of requests for exemption from the Clean Air Act’s (CAA) Renewable Fuels Standards (RFS) program, finding that the CAA’s ‘“nationwide scope or effect’ exception applies, and the case belongs in the D.C. Circuit.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18 reversed and remanded a case over the proper venue to hear challenges to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s disapproval of state implementation plans (SIPs) for new air quality standards under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The court held that the SIPs filed by the states of Oklahoma and Utah are locally or regionally applicable actions reviewable in a regional circuit court.
RICHMOND, Va. — A Fourth Circuit U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel on June 17 affirmed a Virginia federal court’s confirmation of an arbitral award against a Kuwaiti company worth more than $8 million for a dispute with Kellogg Brown & Root International Inc. (KBR) over logistics contracts performed during the Iraq war.
NEW ORLEANS — A split Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s award of $12,241,035.69 to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for consumer complaints about undelivered and unrefunded personal protective equipment (PPE) in the FTC’s dispute with an online retailer over late and undelivered PPE, finding that the retailer failed to provide any evidence to the contrary regarding the amount of undelivered and unrefunded orders.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an electronics company’s petition for a writ of certiorari in which it argued that the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrongly applied the doctrine of laches to counterclaims it brought in a trademark infringement dispute over the use of the marks XTREME and INFINITY in connection with audio speakers.
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A New Mexico appeals court affirmed a lower court’s summary judgment ruling that a cyber insurance policy covered an underlying third-party claim seeking payment for invoices that a now insolvent health insurer mistakenly wired to a fraudulent bank account, finding that the policy term “for a security breach” is ambiguous and must be construed in favor of the insured and the “loss of money” policy exclusions do not apply.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 16 granted a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by a group of religious entities that challenged a New York Court of Appeals ruling on exemptions to a state law mandating that employer health insurance plans cover abortions based on what the entities called “narrow and subjective religious criteria” and vacated and remanded the judgment for further consideration in light of a ruling in a similar case.
NEW YORK — Purdue Pharma LP updated its 13th amended Chapter 11 reorganization plan in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on June 17, a day after all 50 states and the District of Columbia and U.S. territories agreed to a $7.4 billion agreement in principle with Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sackler family that was first announced in January, to settle claims that they contributed to creating the opioid crisis.
CHICAGO — An Illinois appeals panel on June 16 affirmed a lower court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of a professional liability insurer in its declaratory judgment lawsuit disputing coverage for an underlying negligence action brought against its doctor insured, finding that the insurer owed no indemnity obligation for the underlying settlement because the doctor insured was not “legally obligated to pay” anything under the settlement terms.
BOSTON — Affirming summary judgment against an appellant who had asserted wrongful termination and other claims under Rhode Island state law in a dispute involving severance benefits, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 16 ruled that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act preempts all her claims.