Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
While securities class action filings are on the rise within the First Circuit, the District of Massachusetts continues to apply a high degree of scrutiny to securities fraud allegations, including particularized facts...more
On July 14, 2025, we published a detailed Legal Update describing the state of the law with respect to the ongoing wave of ERISA forfeiture lawsuits. This Legal Update analyzes the material developments that we have seen over...more
On July 25, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in United States ex rel. Sedona Partners LLC v. Able Moving & Storage Inc. (No. 22-13340) addressing an important procedural question under the False Claims Act (FCA)...more
On June 10, 2025, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued a noteworthy decision for companies that find themselves contesting prerecorded voice claims. In Taylor v. Kin Insurance Inc.,...more
In today’s fraud notes, we examine two cases: K.M. v. Ursuline School of New Rochelle, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 04643 (2d Dept. Aug. 13, 2025) (here), and Three C, LLC v. City Settlement Serv., Inc., 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 04678 (Aug....more
In a recent decision, GAO announced that it was clarifying its pleading standard for bid protests. For many years, GAO had described a minimally acceptable protest pleading as one with “either allegations or evidence...more
A federal court in Illinois granted Juul Labs, Inc. and HS Wholesale, Ltd.’s motion to dismiss Power Buying Dealers USA, Inc.’s claims of price discrimination. Power Buying Dealers USA, Inc. v. Juul Labs, Inc., 2025 WL...more
In 2022, Alin Pop was scrolling through his Instagram feed, when he found influencers promoting Luli Fama swimwear. “Pop followed what he believed to be the honest advice of the influencers,” and purchased some products for...more
The Sixth Circuit recently delivered a clear message to litigants pursuing claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA): high call volume alone is not enough. In Fluker v. Ally Financial, Inc., the court...more
Comer v. American Transmission Systems, Inc., Civil Action No. 23-1464, 2025 WL 1530750 (W.D. Pa. May 29, 2025) - Carlos Melendez was working on a “transmission tower painting crew” for one of several named defendants when he...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision Cunningham v. Cornell University, 145 S.Ct. 1020 (2025) significantly lowers the pleading standard for prohibited transaction claims under Section 406(a) of the Employee Retirement...more
The TCPA landscape is being reshaped in real time and we’re here to bear witness. With the Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2385 (June 20, 2025), the...more
TCPA revocation cases are on the rise, and a closely related type of case– the internal DNC claim– is on the rise along with it. There is a slight difference between the two types of cases, and one which we don’t talk about...more
The TCPA’s ban on “prerecorded or artificial” voice calls has often been applied to prerecorded or artificially-generated voicemails. Remains unclear to me whether that is the proper application of the statute– the TCPA...more
Judge Nelson S. Román (S.D.N.Y.) recently dismissed a patent-infringement complaint for failure to state a claim, emphasizing the requirement that plaintiffs plead factual allegations rather than legal conclusions....more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently reminded district courts that they may use Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a)(7)—a little-known rule—to screen out meritless complaints before discovery....more
On May 7, 2025, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued a significant decision in Daly v. The Wonderful Company LLC, No. 24 C 1267 (N.D. Ill.). The court dismissed with prejudice a putative class...more
In our prior article, we discussed instances in which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the district courts made different findings with regard to patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. A recent...more
Excessive fee cases against plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) have been on the rise for the last decade. ERISA litigation is expanding with novel theories such as forfeiture litigation....more
A recent decision out of the Eastern District of Virginia, Matthews v. Senior Life Ins. Co., provides a helpful reminder that TCPA complaints do not satisfy Rule 8’s pleading standard if they do not plausibly link the...more
Under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007 (April 17, 2025), plaintiffs asserting that ERISA plan administrators engaged in prohibited transactions under ERISA Section 406 are...more
In Cunningham v. Cornell University,1 the Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs who bring a prohibited transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) are only...more
by Alex Smith The Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding the pleading standards for ERISA prohibited transactions claims in a case involving Cornell’s 403(b) plan to resolve a federal circuit court split. Under...more
Many sponsors and fiduciaries of ERISA retirement plans had been hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Cunningham v. Cornell University (No. 23-1007) would articulate new pleading standards that would slow the...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the pleading requirements to bring a prohibited-transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) in Cunningham v....more