For almost two decades, the California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) has vexed employers and resulted in significant increased exposure to wage and hour claims. To limit exposure, many employers have implemented arbitration agreements that include class and PAGA representative action waivers, which appeared unenforceable. However, in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, the U.S. Supreme Court recently breathed new life into this strategy.
Read more »Tag: supreme court
-
Three Tips for Updating, Enforcing Arbitration Agreements to Minimize PAGA Exposure in California Following Supreme Court’s Viking River Decision Posted on: July 01, 2022 In: Labor & Employment
-
U.S. Supreme Court Gives Grace to Religious Employers Posted on: July 09, 2020 In: Labor & Employment
In 2012, the United States Supreme Court decided Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, 565 U.S. 171, and first recognized a “ministerial exception.” The ministerial exception is a First Amendment doctrine that prohibits civil courts from adjudicating employment-related cases brought by “ministerial” employees against their religious employers.
Read more »
-
U.S. Supreme Court Outlaws Discrimination Against LGBTQ+ Employees Posted on: June 15, 2020 In: Labor & Employment
On June 15, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held that Title VII, the federal employment law that prohibits discrimination “because of sex,” bars discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation and transgender status. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and four liberal members of the Court, penned the 6-3 decision granting nationwide protection to LGBTQ+ employees.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Holds PTAB Decisions Concerning One-Year Time Bar to File IPR Are Not Judicially Reviewable Posted on: May 11, 2020 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, holding that 35 U.S.C. §314(d) precludes judicial review of Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) application of the one-year time bar in a decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR).
Read more »
-
Smooth Sailing for States to Infringe Copyrights Posted on: April 02, 2020 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled 9-0 that a 1990 law intended to provide a means of redress against States that commit copyright infringement is unconstitutional as written, and that sovereign immunity shields States from being held liable for copyright infringement. Though most copyright owners do not have to worry about States infringing their works, the facts of the case offer an important insight that all owners of any IP should note.
Read more »
-
5 Critical Lessons from Comcast Corp. v. Nat’l Ass’n of African American-Owned Media Posted on: March 30, 2020 In: Labor & Employment
Certain to become a major factor in employment litigation, an opinion issued by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 23, 2020 clarifies the burden for plaintiffs to meet in discrimination claims filed under 42 U.S.C. §1981. Here are the top 5 takeaways of this case for employers.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Agrees to Review Appealability of PTAB Time-Bar Rulings Posted on: June 28, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR) upon finding that 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s 1-year time bar to file an IPR does not apply.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Declines to Hear ReDigi First Sale Doctrine Case Posted on: June 28, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
Despite the potentially important impact of the Second Circuit’s decision in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc. on the digital music industry, the United States Supreme Court has denied ReDigi’s petition to review the Second Circuit’s refusal to apply the First Sale Doctrine to the transfer of digital music files.
Read more »
-
SCOTUS: Free Speech Permits Registration of ‘Immoral or Scandalous’ Trademarks Posted on: June 25, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) had violated applicant Erick Brunetti’s First Amendment right to free speech by denying him federal registration of the mark “FUCT” for use in his clothing line. In Iancu v. Brunetti, the Court held the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of trademarks that “consist of or comprise immoral or scandalous matter” as unconstitutional.
Read more »
-
Privilege Review Presents Unique Challenges In Intellectual Property Cases Posted on: June 03, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
Intellectual property (IP) litigation typically requires review and production of large volumes of documents and electronically stored information (ESI). The evolution of ESI has greatly multiplied the number of documents and the coincident broadening of the attorney-client, work product, joint defense, and other privileges has made it much more difficult to identify and remove all privileged documents from production, even after the introduction of rules designed to lessen the burden presented by large ESI
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Issues Major Ruling on the Ongoing Viability of Trademark Licenses by Bankrupt Entities Posted on: May 20, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
At issue in Mission Product Holding v. Tempnology, LLC, was whether a licensee whose license agreement was "rejected" by the bankrupt debtor licensor was permitted to continue using the trademark that was the subject of the license. The debtor/licensor wanted the licensee to cease ongoing usage of the mark and cited to the bankruptcy law's tool of rejection as the basis for doing so. However, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the proposition that the licensee had to cease usage.
Read more »
-
Patent Litigation Trends in the Wake of TC Heartland Posted on: April 25, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
In May 2017, the Supreme Court issued TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, a decision that many expected would significantly limit forum shopping in patent cases. Prior to that case, patentees could file infringement lawsuits in any court with personal jurisdiction over the accused infringer, so most corporations were subject to suit in every district court.
Read more »