SCOTUSBlog

SEPTEMBER 29, 2023

On Friday, the justices agreed to decide whether the Nollan / Dolan test applies to a California man’s challenge to a development fee, or whether – as a California appeals court ruled – the fee is instead immune from such review because it was authorized by legislation. A federal appeals court ruled that Fikre’s case was not moot.

Calendaring 121

Calendaring Court Statute Court Rules 121

SCOTUSBlog

JULY 1, 2021

Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday narrowed the doctrine of patent assignor estoppel, which prohibits an inventor from assigning a patent to someone and then later contending in litigation that the patent is invalid. By a vote of 5-4, the court rejected calls to completely abandon the doctrine. Formica Insulation Co. ,

Stare Decisis 104

Stare Decisis Court Rules Court Manufacturing 104

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 20, 2022

Two pending petitions raise the question of the constitutionality of state statutes providing that corporations are deemed to have consented to “general” personal jurisdiction by virtue of having registered to do business in a state. Some older Supreme Court decisions support that theory of consent. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. ,

Statute 105

Statute Stare Decisis Court Manufacturing 105

Patently O

MARCH 18, 2024

by Dennis Crouch In a recent nonprecedential decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court ruling ordering the correction of inventorship for U.S. Tube-Mac, is the plaintiff in this case and is looking to manufacture its own version of the container systems. The inventorship correction statute – 35 U.S.C. §

Statute 57

Statute Cause of Action Court Rules Court 57

FDA Law Blog

OCTOBER 4, 2021

In yet another decision based on statutory interpretation, an appellate court has decided that FDA’s interpretation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) is contrary to the plain text of the statute. As courts keep hitting the Agency “…Baby, One More Time ,” the appellate court these days seems Toxic for FDA.

Statute 52

Statute Court Manufacturing Court Rules 52

JonathanTurley

OCTOBER 30, 2023

The court ruled against her and found that the park’s duty was only to “make conditions as safe as they appear to be” and that Munoz “ was aware of the risk she encountered, and expected to be surprised, startled, and scared.” See Pennsylvania General Assembly Statute §7102. Trimble ␣ 315 Mo.

Tort 46

Tort Litigation Litigating Manufacturing 46

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

OCTOBER 7, 2019

Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. EPA remanded the standards but did not vacate the rule. American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers v. and non-U.S.

Court 40

Court Government Statute Tort 40