SAN FRANCISCO - A California appellate panel on Feb. 17 affirmed a ruling in favor of various lenders, finding that property owners failed to show that they had standing to challenge a foreclosure under a pooling and services agreement (Hanneke C. Gary R. Lohse, v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, et al., No. A142814, Calif. App., 1st App., Div. 4, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub LEXIS 1210).
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - The Arkansas Supreme Court on Feb. 16 upheld a circuit court's certification of a class of city workers suing for breach of contract after mandated raises ended (City of Conway, an Arkansas Municipality v. Richard Shumate, Jr., et al., No. CV-16-284, Ark. Sup., 2017 Ark. LEXIS 41).
NEWARK, N.J. - Remand of an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit to state court is proper because a third-party's claims are not preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), a federal magistrate judge in New Jersey ruled Feb. 17 (North Jersey Brain & Spine Center v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 16-1544, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22710).
NEW YORK - In a divided opinion, a New York appellate panel on Feb. 21 affirmed a trial court order denying motions for summary judgment filed by a doctor and a hospital in a medical malpractice suit because summary judgment is not proper when two sets of experts have differing opinions (Marino Servino etc., et al. v. Mark Weller, M.D., et al., No. 106422/09, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 1st Dept., 2017 N.Y. Sup. App. Div. LEXIS 1307).
CINCINNATI - After finding that a former marketing director's claims for coverage against a medical review company were completely preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 17 affirmed dismissal of the claims and found that a previous lawsuit filed against a plan administrator was the proper recourse (James Hackney v. Allmed Healthcare Management Inc., No. 16-5651, 6th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 2877).
NEW ORLEANS - Plaintiffs in an asbestos exposure case are entitled to further discovery in an attempt to muster the difficult support they need to overcome jurisdictional issues against one defendant and must amend their complaint to allege more specifics against a second company, a federal judge in Louisiana held Feb. 16 (Robin Murphy, et al. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., et al., No. 15-5566, E.D. La., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21979).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a computer security patent is obvious never should have been reached because the board erroneously determined that the invention at issue qualifies as a covered business method (CBM), a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Feb. 21 (Secure Axcess LLC v. PNC Bank National Association, et al., No. 16-1353, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 2902).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 21 denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in a case in which an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed the dismissal of claims against a third-party administrator of an employee pension benefit plan because it was not a fiduciary of the plan and a self-dealing claim was time-barred (Carolinas Electrical Workers Retirement Plan, et al. v. Zenith American Solutions Inc., et al., No. 16-731, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 21 denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in a case in which the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said a district court did not err in determining that a disability plan did not wrongfully terminate a claimant's long-term disability benefits (Elizabeth Jenkins v. Grant Thornton LLP, et al., No. 16-682, U.S. Sup.).
ATLANTA - One of four plaintiffs who won a $26.74 million pelvic mesh verdict against Boston Scientific Corp. has settled with the defendant, defense counsel told the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 21 (Amal Eghnayem, et al. v. Boston Scientific Corporation, No. 16-11818-H, 11th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 21 denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a stock-drop case arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Alex E. Rinehart, et al. v. John F. Akers, et al., No. 16-562, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO - Monsanto Co. on Feb. 21 filed an answer in California federal court, arguing that the personal injury case brought against it related to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, contending that the allegations against the company are "vague and conclusory and comprise attorney characterizations" about a product that "repeatedly has been found to be safe to humans and the environment by regulators in the United States and around the world" (In Re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2741, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The church plan exemption in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act unambiguously requires that a church plan be established by a church, the appellee-respondents in three cases consolidated before the U.S. Supreme Court say in their initial brief filed Feb. 16 (Advocate Health Care Network, et al. v. Maria Stapleton, et al., No. 16-74, Saint Peter's Healthcare System, et al. v. Laurence Kaplan, No. 16-86, Dignity Health, et al. v. Starla Rollins, No. 16-258, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 515).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - A federal judge in Connecticut on Feb. 17 held that a couple could pursue claims that allegedly improper installation of spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation in their home resulted in property damage requiring remediation but that they failed to provide causation evidence to show that they suffered respiratory problems after being exposed to volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors from the products (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23434).
CINCINNATI - The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 21 affirmed a preemption ruling in a Depakote birth defect case and said the trial judge did not err in limiting plaintiff experts' testimony or failing to give the jury her proposed instructions about warnings (Pamela Rheinfrank, et al. v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., et al., No. 16-3347, 6th Cir.).
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. - A federal judge in Michigan on Feb. 17 issued an order canceling oral arguments in a case brought by residents of the city of Flint, Mich., who seek damages for injuries from exposure to lead-contaminated drinking water, ruling that the court is "obligated to examine" the subject matter jurisdiction of the case (Tamara Nappier v. Richard Snyder, et al., No. 16-636, W.D. Mich.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A unitary abuse of discretion standard is the appropriate one to use when reviewing the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's subpoena enforcement decisions, an attorney representing an employer argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 21 (McLane Company, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, No. 15-1248, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in finding that the supply of one component of a five-component genetic testing kit manufactured abroad triggers domestic patent liability under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. 271(f)(1), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Feb. 22 (Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., No. 14-1538, U.S. Sup.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - In conjunction with its pending motion for discovery to establish California jurisdiction over a former employee accused of trade secret violations, a Russian railcar company on Jan. 17 filed a proposed order in California federal court, permitting it to subpoena Google Inc. to obtain information about the defendant's Gmail email account (OOO Brunswick Rail Management, et al. v. Richard Sultanov, et al., No. 5:17-cv-00017, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8374).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Feb. 16 granted final approval of a nearly $344,000 settlement to be paid to a class of Uber Technologies Inc. customers who allege that Uber wrongfully retained a portion of gratuity charges paid by passengers (Caren Ehret, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 14-113, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22586).
CHARLESTON, S.C. - Pella Corp. says in an opposition brief filed Feb. 16 that a federal judge in South Carolina should not reconsider his Dec. 12 ruling that plaintiffs' experts' opinions about defects in the company's Architect and Designer Series windows are unreliable because the plaintiffs' arguments have already been raised and were rejected (In re: Pella Corporation Architect and Designer Series Windows Marketing, Sales Practices and products Liability Litigation, MDL 2514, Case No. 14mn1, D. S.C.).
NOIDA, India - An Indian toll bridge company on Feb. 17 said it has initiated arbitration proceedings against a development authority, asserting claims for breach of a concession agreement.
TAMPA, Fla. - A Florida federal judge on Feb. 16 granted judgment in favor of a boat maker, finding that customer information did not constitute a trade secret and that a reasonable jury could not find that it infringed on another company's trade dress when it manufactured an allegedly similar boat (Yellowfin Yachts Inc. v. Barker Boatworks, LLC, et al., No. 8:15-cv-990, M.D. Fla.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21745).