A website-tracking plaintiff lacked federal standing because she did not identify sensitive information disclosed or a highly offensive privacy intrusion.
A Southern District judge ordered ICE to release a Haitian national who had lived on humanitarian parole for years before being re-detained without notice or a hearing.
A federal judge held that a liquor-liability insurer owed a defense because its own investigation revealed facts creating a potential for coverage.
A Southern District judge ordered the release of a former unaccompanied minor whom immigration authorities re-detained without notice or an individualized hearing.
A federal judge dismissed deficient municipal-liability claims with leave to amend while allowing a fact-dependent equitable-tolling theory to proceed beyond the pleading stage.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of claims based on Instagram accusations arising from a climbing dispute and declined to apply Washington’s anti-SLAPP statute.
An Eastern District court held that federal jurisdiction-stripping provisions barred an APA challenge to USCIS’s dismissal of an asylum application tied to expedited removal.
A Central District court kept a wage-and-hour class action in federal court because potential waiting-time penalties alone plausibly exceeded CAFA’s $5 million threshold.
A Northern District court dismissed an artist’s AI-training DMCA claims because the complaint did not adequately allege intentional metadata removal or distribution of his works.
A Northern District court allowed DMCA anti-circumvention claims against ByteDance over alleged YouTube scraping to proceed past the pleading stage.
A Northern District court dismissed a premises-liability suit against a Whole Foods holding company but allowed discovery into the corporate relationships relevant to jurisdiction.
The Second District Court of Appeal holds an insurer may rescind a policy for an applicant’s concealment of a material fact even if the insurer’s application never asked about it — and that a manager’s knowledge of his own embezzlement can be imputed to the company he managed.
The Ninth Circuit affirms summary judgment for Nike, holding that an employee’s stated religious objection to a Covid-19 vaccine requirement failed as a matter of law where her own testimony showed the real basis for her objection was secular medical skepticism.
The Ninth Circuit remands an asylum denial after finding the Board of Immigration Appeals’ conclusion that a kidnapping victim could safely relocate anywhere in Mexico outside one state was internally inconsistent with the agency’s own findings about the cartel’s reach.
A Central District court ordered an asylum applicant released after holding that years of government-authorized liberty could not be ended without notice and a prior hearing.
The court granted remand to Solano County Superior Court because the removing defendants did not establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction. The order rejected the asserted basis for keeping the dispute in federal court and closed the federal case.
The court remanded the vehicle case to Solano County Superior Court because General Motors removed too late. The sales contract was an “other paper” from which removability could be ascertained and triggered the second thirty-day deadline under 28 U.S.C. section 1446(b)(3).
A federal judge refused to dismiss a healthcare False Claims Act suit, allowing the whistleblower’s government-billing allegations to proceed.
The Northern District temporarily froze disputed employee-benefit funds and set an expedited hearing and briefing schedule.
A Northern District court allowed a prisoner’s Eighth Amendment claims to proceed where staff allegedly removed mobility equipment and forced him to crawl.
A Northern District court compelled arbitration of fragrance-sensitivity discrimination claims because the electronic rental agreements contained enforceable delegation clauses.
A Southern District court held that a temporary appellate stay, without another obstacle to removal, did not justify release from post-removal immigration detention.
A Northern District court allowed three tightly limited customer depositions in patent litigation while refusing a fourth request unsupported by a specific evidentiary need.
A Southern District court allowed Pattern’s co-founder to intervene narrowly so he can seek disqualification of Arlo’s counsel based on an alleged prior attorney-client relationship.