MENU

Orders

News

Supreme Court Columns

SCOTUS Cert update

Timothy Courtney December 15, 2016
SHARE:      

The Supreme Court granted cert in four new cases yesterday.

(1 & 2) Turner v. United States and Overton v. United States (consolidated): Whether the petitioners’ convictions must be set aside under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 (1963)

(3) Lee v. United States:  Whether it is always irrational for a noncitizen defendant with longtime legal resident status and extended familial and business ties to the United States to reject a plea offer notwithstanding strong evidence of guilt when the plea would result in mandatory and permanent deportation.

(4) TC Heartland v. Kraft Food Brands Group: Whether the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), which provides that patent infringement actions “may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides[,]” is the sole and exclusive provision governing venue in patent infringement actions and is not to be supplemented by the statute governing “[v]enue generally,” 28 U.S.C. § 1391, which has long contained a subsection (c) that, where applicable, deems a corporate entity to reside in multiple judicial districts.

News

Article: Supreme Court Season of Turmoil

SCOTUS order updates

Timothy Courtney December 02, 2016
SHARE:      

This afternoon the Supreme Court issued an order granting certiorari in seven cases, three of which were consolidated:

(1) Howell v. Howell: Whether the Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act pre-empts a state court’s order directing a veteran to indemnify a former spouse for a reduction in the former spouse’s portion of the veteran’s military retirement pay, when that reduction results from the veteran’s post-divorce waiver of retirement pay in order to receive compensation for a service-connected disability.

(2) Impression Products v. Lexmark Int'l: (1) Whether a “conditional sale” that transfers title to the patented item while specifying post-sale restrictions on the article's use or resale avoids application of the patent-exhaustion doctrine and therefore permits the enforcement of such post-sale restrictions through the patent law’s infringement remedy; and (2) whether, in light of this court’s holding in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. that the common-law doctrine barring restraints on alienation that is the basis of exhaustion doctrine “makes no geographical distinctions,” a sale of a patented article – authorized by the U.S. patentee – that takes place outside the United States exhausts the U.S. patent rights in that article. 

(3-5) The ERISA church-plan exemption cases (consolidated, one hour for oral argument):  Whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974's church-plan exemption applies so long as a pension plan is maintained by an otherwise-qualifying church-affiliated organization, or whether the exemption applies only if, in addition, a church initially established the plan.

-Advocate Health Care v. Stapleton

-St. Peter's Healthcare v. Kaplan

-Dignity Health v. Rollins

(6) Water Splash v. Menon: Whether the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters authorizes service of process by mail.

(7) Los Angeles County v. Mendez: (grant limited to questions 1 and 3): (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's “provocation” rule should be barred as it conflicts with Graham v. Connor regarding the manner in which a claim of excessive force against a police officer should be determined in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a violation of a plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights, and has been rejected by other courts of appeals; ... and (3) whether, in an action brought under Section 1983, an incident giving rise to a reasonable use of force is an intervening, superseding event which breaks the chain of causation from a prior, unlawful entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment.