December 2019 | Issue 3

Calendar of Cases

Georgia et al. v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc.

As a general rule, the law is not subject to copyright. A judicially created exception, known as the “government edicts” doctrine, applies to certain works having a force of law, including those created by state governments. The (presently) copyrighted annotations to the Georgia statutes are prepared by LexisNexis Group, but the annotations, although used by the court, do not have the force of law.

Rodriguez v. FDIC

The parties are two insolvent entities, a parent corporation, United Western Bancorp Inc. (UWBI), and its subsidiary, United Western Bank (Bank). Simon Rodriguez, bankruptcy trustee for UWBI, is the petitioner. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the receiver for the United Western Bank, is the respondent.

Atlantic Richfield Company v. Christian, et al.

The Atlantic Richfield Company bought the Anaconda Company, the operator of a massive copper smelter in Deer Lodge County, Montana, in 1977. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) enables the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to control environmental cleanup and recover the costs from liable parties.

Intel Corp. Investment v. Sulyma

Christopher Sulyma, a former employee of Intel, brought a putative class action against plan fiduciaries for overinvestment in hedge funds and private equity, which caused the actively managed portfolio to incur “massive losses and enormous excess fees.” Sulyma v. Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee, 2017 WL 1217185 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2018).

Banister v. Davis

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) imposed significant limitations on multiple habeas corpus petitions. The AEDPA generally prohibits the filing of successive or second habeas petitions. This means many inmates are entitled to only one full habeas petition.

Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr and Ovalles v. Barr

Congress has removed habeas review for aliens with certain criminal histories. However, Congress also passed the REAL ID Savings Clause in 2005 which preserves judicial review “of constitutional claims or questions of law.” The question in these two consolidated cases is whether the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly determined that it lacked jurisdiction to determine whether the doctrine of equitable tolling provided petitioners with the ability to have their removal cases heard.

Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP

The Court will consider whether Congress intended to preclude jurisdictional review of decisions not to institute an inter partes review (IPR) under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). Sections 315(a)(1)–(b) of the AIA provides that inter partes review also “may not be instituted” if (1) “before the date on which the petition for such a review is filed, the petitioner or real party in interest filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent”; or (2) “the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent.”

Mathena v. Malvo | Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United States | Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Co. v. United States

This case examines the consequences of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana, specifically whether the Court’s prohibition of mandatory juvenile life without parole sentences requires that a court weigh the possible mitigation of the juvenile offender’s youth prior to sentencing the juvenile offender to life without parole.

Holguin-Hernandez v. United States

Petitioner Gonzalo Holguin-Hernandez was convicted in 2016 in the Western District of Texas for possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute. He was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment and 2 years of supervised release. While on supervised release in 2017, Holguin was arrested again in the Western District of Texas and charged with possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute.

Monasky v. Taglieri

The Hague Convention requires international custody disputes to be resolved in the child’s country of “habitual residence” and discourages parents from leaving that country with the child. In this case, a U.S. district court ruled that an American mother must return her infant daughter to Italy, where she was born and the father remained.

McKinney v. Arizona

James McKinney was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. He appealed his sentence to the Arizona Supreme Court, arguing that the sentencing judge failed to consider mitigating evidence of his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

American Bar Association TM American Bar Association