Because my practice focuses on complex commercial disputes–especially cases involving antitrust, oil and gas, and patents–I keep daily track of important decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the highest appeals courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas.
Because my practice focuses on complex commercial disputes–especially cases involving antitrust, oil and gas, and patents–I keep daily track of important decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals.
You can follow along during the week on Twitter (@contingencyblog) or here at The Contingency each Monday with this Commercial Case Roundup: U.S. Appeals. Continue Reading Commercial Case Roundup: U.S. Appeals
Weekly round up from The Contingency on Twitter. #contingencyblog Continue Reading Weekly Roundup: U.S. Courts of Appeals
- Federal Circuit grants Commerce Secretary broad power to remove IPR judges to clean up appointments clause mess.
- Receipt of credit report by person who doesn’t have authorization counts as Article III injury for standing purposes.
- Health care records case goes back to trial court to ease certification of issues to New York Court of Appeals.
- Bankruptcy preemption defense to debt-collection class claim didn’t raise individual issue for class members.
You may access the Court’s 5-4 ruling against including a citizenship question in the 2020 census here: Department of Commerce v. New York (U.S. June 27, 2019).
United States District Judge Lucy Koh ruled on May 22, 2019, after a 10-day bench trial in January, that Qualcomm has and abused “monopoly chip power”. Qualcomm Findings and Conclusions 5-22-19.
Judge Richard Leon, of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, ruled today that the United States failed to persuade him to block AT&T’s bid to acquire Time Warner under antitrust law. See the 172-page opus here: AT&T Opinion 6-12-18
Today, United States District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan issued LIBOR VII, in which the court granted class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) to a class of plaintiffs who bought over-the-counter instruments that paid interest in terms of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and who allege that LIBOR-setting banks conspired to suppress LIBOR during the 2007-09 financial crisis.
The court declined to certify the OTC plaintiffs’ state-law claims or any claims by two other plaintiff groups. See LIBOR VII.
Plaintiffs started filing actions alleging LIBOR suppression in 2011. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the federal cases in the Southern District of New York before Judge Buchwald later that year.
The litigation has produced seven major rulings by the district court, two by the Second Circuit, and one by the Supreme Court. The later Second Circuit opinions came out last week. See Charles Schwab Corp. v. Bank of Am. Corp., No. 16-1189-cv (2d Cir. Feb. 23, 2018).
OTC plaintiffs have so far asked Judge Buchwald to approve class settlements totaling $490 million with Barclays, Citibank, and Deutsche Bank.
The court appointed Susman Godfrey LLP and Hausfeld LLP to serve as lead counsel for the class.