Drilling Down: Real Parties in Interest and Time Bars - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Michigan Supreme Court recently held in Rayford v. American House Roseville I LLC that courts must review for reasonableness provisions in employment contracts that limit the amount of time within which an employee may...more
On July 31, 2025, in Rayford v. American House Roseville I, LLC, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that contractual time limitations for employment lawsuits must pass a reasonableness test....more
In a decision that seems like to be reviewed by the California Supreme Court or rejected by other California Courts of Appeal, one of California’s appellate courts has issued a perplexing decision holding that even employees...more
In yet another unfavorable opinion for employers, a California Court of Appeal ruled an employee may maintain a representative action under the Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) on behalf of “aggrieved employees”...more
On July 21, 2021, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, held in Johnson v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., that an aggrieved employee whose individual claim was time-barred had standing to pursue a...more
In Johnson v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Johnson”), the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division One (San Diego) held that an employee, whose individual claim is time-barred, may still pursue a...more
The federal appeals court that has jurisdiction over New York employers recently issued a decision holding that a plaintiff must plausibly allege “willfulness” to secure the benefit of the longer three-year limitations period...more
In recent years, a body of law has developed surrounding pattern or practice lawsuits brought by the EEOC. This has helped to clarify, for example, when the 300-day filing cutoff applies, or whether the claimant is eligible...more
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), a plaintiff may bring strictly state-based claims in federal district court if they are related to a claim over which the district court has original jurisdiction. This is more commonly known as...more
On January 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its first 5-4 merits decision of the term in Artis v. District of Columbia. In this opinion, the Court held that bringing state claims in federal court stops the clock on the...more
On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 opinion in Artis v. District of Columbia, Case No. 16-460, clarifying the application of 28 U.S.C. section 1367(d)....more