Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
(Podcast) The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
RICO's Person/Enterprise Distinction - RICO Report Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
A Discussion on the Kollaritsch v. Michigan State University Board of Trustees Decision
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Case Involving Burger King Employee Spitting in Officer’s Burger Goes Before WA Supreme Court
On June 30, 2025, the US District Court for the District of New Jersey denied Apple’s Motion to Dismiss the U.S. Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) lawsuit accusing the company of violating Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act...more
On April 11, 2025, Judge George H. Wu of the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued a ruling on a motion to dismiss filed by Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. and Ticketmaster LLC...more
The U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division and state antitrust authorities have plausibly alleged that Live Nation engaged in illegal tying and coercion of performing artists, a federal judge in the Southern District...more
On January 10, 2025, Judge Kenneth D. Bell of the United States Court for the Western District of North Carolina denied NASCAR’s motion to dismiss stock car racing team 23XI Racing’s (“plaintiff”) monopolization case against...more
On October 16, 2024, Judge David Barlow of the United States District Court for the District of Utah granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims that nine defendants (specifically, sellers, distributors, and...more
On June 11, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ damages claim in a lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice and eight states...more
A Texas federal court dismissed the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) lawsuit against private equity (PE) owner, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe (Welsh Carson), while allowing to proceed the agency’s challenge against U.S....more
The FTC’s enforcement efforts against private equity hit a significant roadblock on May 13 when a federal judge granted Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe’s (Welsh Carson) motion to dismiss the agency’s complaint against the...more
Google LLC and Alphabet Inc. (Google) moved to dismiss a third successive complaint that alleged it tied the sales of Maps, Routes and Places application programming interface (API) services to one another. A basic tying...more
As reported in a prior blog post, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed suit in federal district court in September alleging that U.S. Anesthesia Partners, Inc. (“USAP”), and the private equity firm Welsh, Carson,...more
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of iPhone owners who are suing Apple. The iPhone owners claim that Apple, through its App Store, has established a monopoly and uses that power to charge consumers more for...more
The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision to dismiss 12 Orange County cities from federal antitrust lawsuits alleging the municipalities monopolized ambulance services in their boundaries....more
On March 27, 2018, the Third Circuit affirmed dismissal of an antitrust suit against Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) by the Philadelphia Taxi Association and its members, individual taxicab companies (together,...more
On March 1, a New York appeals court ruled that American International Group, Inc. (AIG) need not defend Carfax, Inc. against a $50 million suit alleging the company monopolized the vehicle history report market. ...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently addressed again when plaintiffs have standing to pursue federal antitrust claims under the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431...more
On September 28, 2016, the Third Circuit issued an opinion in Mylan v. Warner Chilcott, upholding the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s holding on summary judgement that Defendants’ “product hopping” conduct did not violate...more
On July 28, 2016, District Judge Denise Cote (S.D.N.Y.) granted defendants AlphaCap Ventures, LLC’s, a non-practicing entity, and Richard Juarez’s (collectively, “AlphaCap”) motion to dismiss plaintiff Gust, Inc.’s (“Gust”)...more
An upstart rodeo association, created and owned by professional rodeo cowboys, challenged that its competitor’s bylaws aimed at the new association and its participants constituted agreements that unreasonably restrain trade...more
Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more
Traditionally, plaintiffs asserting claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act allege the existence of one or more product markets relevant to the defendants’ anticompetitive conduct and the defendants’ shares of those...more