DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., et al. v. Wullschleger et al., upheld the Eighth Circuit’s decision, holding that when a plaintiff amends their complaint and deletes...more
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed so-called “Snap Removals” in the case of In re Levy, 52 F.4th 244, 245 (5th Cir. 2022). In Levy, the plaintiff, Calvin Levy, petitioned the Fifth Circuit for a writ of...more
Faegre Drinker’s snap removal team continuously monitors snap removal updates across the country (for a basic explanation of snap removal and previous updates, see Faegre Drinker’s prior posts...; for a breakdown on how each...more
Faegre Drinker’s snap removal team closely monitors snap removal updates across the United States (for a basic explanation of snap removal and previous updates, see Faegre Drinker’s prior posts...; for a breakdown on which...more
Pre-service removal—known colloquially as “snap removal”—continues to be adopted in more jurisdictions... In Doe v. Daversa Partners, 2021 WL 736734, at *3 (D.D.C. Feb. 25, 2021), the U.S. District Court for the District...more
A New Jersey District Court Judge has ruled that the March 2020 federal liability immunity statute for pandemic-related countermeasures does not create a basis for federal jurisdiction, resulting in the remand of two...more
Last week, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court decision remanding Baltimore’s climate change litigation to state court. I wouldn’t read too much into the decision, which is founded on the niceties of...more
In general, a defendant may not remove a case to federal court if the action includes a non-diverse defendant or a defendant who is a resident of the state in which the action was filed. This general rule does not apply,...more
On May 14, 2018, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a significant jurisdictional decision that further limits defendants’ use of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016). In Collier v. SP Plus Corp., No....more
We’ve already written about Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that all federal plaintiffs, even those alleging a statutory violation, must have suffered a real, concrete...more
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Impression Products v. Lexmark will force patentees to get what they can in their initial sale or licensing of patented products in both the U.S. and abroad, knowing that they will have to rely...more
Ever since Alabama’s new economic nexus regulation went into effect, litigation over its constitutionality has been expected given that Alabama Commissioner Julie Magee and Governor Bentley said as much when announcing it...more
In Rodriguez v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, the Ninth Circuit continues a string of recent decisions cracking down on district courts’ tendency to remand class actions on the purported basis that the defendant failed to meet the...more