A "substate" governmental entity that engages in conduct that would usually violate the Sherman Act may escape liablity under the state-action doctrine if the "state" directs "substate" to do the anticompetitive deeds. But the state must "'clearly articulate[] and affirmatively express[]' state policy to displace competition." Fed'l Trade Comm'n v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc., No. 11-1160, slip
Sotomayor
Waiver Ban Skips “Right to Sue” in Credit Repair Notice, Supreme Court Holds
A federal law says firms that offer "credit repair" have to tell customers about their "right to sue a credit repair organization that violates" the law. The statute also voids "[a]ny waiver by any consumer of any protection provided by or any right of the consumer under this subchapter".
May a consumer still waive …
Infringers Must Show Patent Invalidity Clearly and Convincingly, Supreme Court Holds
Seven justices today rejected an attempt to make patents easier for judges and juries to find invalid. The Court held that Congress's granting patents a presumption of validity saves patents unless their foes prove a basis for invalidity with "clear and convincing" evidence. Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership, No. 10-290 (U.S. June 9…
Supremes Bar Right to Test Order That Strips Privilege; Sotomayor Pens Her First Opinion
Congress allows appeals from "final" judgments but seldom other kinds. 28 U.S.C. 1291. An order that rejects most but not all claims on a motion to dismiss, for instance, doesn't count as final. (One to stand while speaking in court or to wear a yellow tie doesn't either.) But what if the ruling requires you to give…