SAN ANTONIO - A couple's lawsuit claiming that Volkswagen Group of America Inc. and a local car dealer misrepresented a vehicle's emissions and fuel efficiency should be remanded to state court, a federal judge in Texas ruled Jan. 10, finding that the plaintiffs do not allege that the manufacturer violated the Clean Air Act (CAA) (David L. Bullerwell, et al. v. Volkswagen Group of America Inc., et al., No. SA-16-CV-1199-XR, W.D. Texas; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3648).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A California federal judge on Jan. 10 granted a retailer's motion to compel supplemental responses to certain discovery requests from a purchaser who asserts claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL), false advertising and other claims related to its pricing (Marilyn Sperling v. Stein Mart Inc., et al., No. 15-1411, C.D. Calif.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3668).
CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. - A defendant's motion to dismiss, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), allegations that he infringed the "Canon" trademark was rejected Jan. 11 by a New York federal judge (Canon-U.S.A. Inc. v. F&E Trading, LLC, et al., No. 15-6015, E.D. N.Y.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4223).
WILMINGTON, Del. - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals recently rejected the foreseeability standard plaintiffs seek in an asbestos action, a Delaware judge federal held Jan. 9 in adopting a magistrate judge's recommendation that two motions for summary judgment be granted (Jimmy R. Mitchell and Connie Mitchell v. Atwood & Morill Co., et al., No. 15-958, D. Del.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115210).
NEW YORK - A New York federal judge on Jan. 10 refused to compel arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Court of Arbitration of a dispute over the purchase of a rail-signaling business, finding that the terms of the agreement require that the case be determined by an independent accounting firm (IAF) (Alstom, et al. v. General Electric Company, No. 16-CV-3568, S.D. N.Y.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3188).
ALBANY, N.Y. - The New York Court of Appeals on Jan. 10 certified a question from the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals regarding reinsurance liability cap limits as they relate to per-occurrence loss and expense (Global Reinsurance of America v. Century Indemnity Company, No. 34, N.Y. App.).
JACKSON, Miss. - Finding no error in the admission of accident reconstruction expert testimony, a Mississippi appeals panel on Jan. 10 affirmed the felony conviction of a woman for her drunken driving, which caused a death (Sara Jane Koch a/k/a Sarah Koch a/k/a Sara J. Koch v. State of Mississippi, No. 2015-KA-01228-COA, Miss. App.; 2017 Miss. App. LEXIS 15).
NEW ORLEANS - The Louisiana federal judge overseeing the Taxotere hair loss multidistrict litigation on Jan. 11 told liaison counsel that the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) intends that claims against generic drug manufacturers be included in the MDL (In Re: Taxotere [Docetaxel] Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2740, No. 16-md-2740, E.D. La.).
NEW YORK - A power company's specification that contractors use asbestos and its ability to prevent the related injuries allow it to be held liable under New York Labor Law Section 200, a divided New York appellate court held Jan. 10 (Phyllis Brown, et al. v. A.O. Smith Water Products, et al., No. 190415/12, 206, 205, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 1st Dept.; 2017 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 98).
ELGIN, Ill. - An Illinois appellate panel on Jan. 9 found that a trial court correctly denied a plaintiff's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial in a medical malpractice suit because the plaintiff failed to raise objections during the trial (Katherine Sondergaard v. Arnold J. Herbstman M.D., No. 2-15-1263, Ill. App. 2nd Dist.; 2017 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 23).
NEW YORK - Experts in an asbestos case may make qualitative evaluations regarding exposure and need not precisely identify the quantity of exposure, a New York justice held in a Jan. 9 opinion denying defendants' wide-ranging motion (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, Geraldine Andrews, et al. v. A.O. Smith Water Products, et al., No. 190034/15, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.; 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 12).
TRENTON, N.J. - Additional discovery is needed into two Canadian companies' contacts with New Jersey so that a woman can fairly contest motions to dismiss her asbestos action on jurisdictional grounds, a federal judge in New Jersey said Jan. 9 (Estelle Grimes, et al. v. AT&T Corp., et al., No. 15-8466, D. N.J.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181534).
LOS ANGELES - An investor in a shareholder derivative lawsuit against 17 current and former executive officers and directors of a drug company has failed to show that the defendants were interested in the outcome of the litigation or that their actions were in violation of the business judgment rule under Aronson v. Lewis, a federal judge in California ruled Jan. 10 in granting the company's motion to dismiss (Judy Durgin v. Kevin Sharer, et al., No. 07-3001, C.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK - Lead plaintiffs in a securities class action lawsuit against a Chinese online retailer and others have failed to plead any actionable misrepresentations or omissions in support of their claim that the defendants concealed their intention to shut down the company's beauty supply marketplace in violation of federal securities laws, a federal judge in New York ruled Jan. 10 in granting the defendants' motion to dismiss certain claims (In re Jumei International Holding Limited Securities Litigation, No. 14-9826, S.D. N.Y.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3206).
COLUMBUS, Ohio - The judge presiding over the multidistrict litigation against E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. for alleged injuries connected to exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (known as C8) on Jan. 10 issued a group of orders pertaining to punitive damages, damages related to cancer phobia and the admissibility of expert testimonies (In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. C8 Personal Injury Litigation, MDL No. 2433, No. 13-2433, S.D. Ohio).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An appellant seeking to challenge a final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that confirmed the validity of a conjugated antibody patent was turned away on Jan. 9 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Phigenix Inc. v. ImmunoGen Inc., No. 16-1544, Fed. Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 323).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9 asked the U.S. solicitor general to file a brief expressing the government's views in a case that asks whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act permits a cause of action for indemnity or contribution by a person found liable for breach of fiduciary duty (David B. Fenkell v. Alliance Holdings Inc., et al., No. 16-473, U.S. Sup.).
MIAMI - A former law enforcement officer's privacy claims under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) and related civil rights claims were properly dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations, an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Jan. 9, finding that the claims accrued on the date that the purported violations occurred (Shaun Foudy, et al. v. Indian River County Sheriff's Office, et al., No. 15-14646, 15-14659 and 15-15015, 11th Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 369)
NEW ORLEANS - In a Jan. 11 ruling, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a Texas federal judge's determination that a state law claim of unfair competition by misappropriation - levied in connection with allegations of stolen instructional drawings - is preempted by the Copyright Act (Ultraflo Corporation v. Pelican Worldwide, et al., No. 15-20084, 5th Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 509).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9 declined to review a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling that affirmed the dismissal of claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act against Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. (BAH) based on its conclusion that BAH's Stock Rights Plan did not qualify as an ERISA plan because its primary purpose was not to provide deferred compensation or other retirement benefits (Foster Rich v. Ralph W. Shrader, et al., No. 16-415, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9 let stand a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling that affirmed the dismissal of claims that the Michigan Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act is preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Self-Insurance Institute of America Inc. v. Rick Snyder, et al., No. 16-593, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California appeals panel on Jan. 10 affirmed a lower court's grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer seeking recoupment of the costs it incurred in defending its agents against claims it brought against the agents involving trade secrets (State Farm Fire And Casualty Co. v. Richard Pyorre, No. A147302, Calif. App., 1st Dist., Div. 1).
BOSTON - A shareholder failed to show that a medical device maker and certain of its current and former executive officers issued material misrepresentations or omissions in connection with the company's statements made regarding the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approval of a spinal injury repair device, a First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Jan. 9 (Edmond Ganem, et al. v. InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp., et al., No. 15-1544, 1st Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 385).
DETROIT - The U.S. Department of Justice announced that a federal judge in Michigan on Jan. 9 sentenced a neurosurgeon to 235 months in prison for his role in a $2.8 million Medicare fraud scheme that involved the doctor billing public and private insurers for spinal fusions that he never performed (United States of America v. Aria O. Sabit, No. 15cr20311, E.D. Mich.).