Court Stare Decisis Statute 
SCOTUSBlog
DECEMBER 1, 2022
Those who spoke extensively, however, seem ready to reject the government’s argument that the statute of limitations at issue here is a strict jurisdictional rule, as opposed to a “mere” claims-processing rule, which could be waived in an appropriate case. It has stare decisis effect.” Commissioner.
Patently O
FEBRUARY 23, 2023
University of Illinois Foundation (1971), the Supreme Court held that a judgment of invalidity in a suit against one infringer accrues to the benefit of any other accused infringer unless the patent owner shows that he did not have a fair opportunity procedurally, substantively and evidentially to pursue his patent claim the first time.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Patently O
JULY 24, 2024
Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. Consider first stare decisis and the Court’s overruling of Chevron deference (i.e. no standing requirement).
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 20, 2021
Share This Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Minerva Surgical Inc. Federal courts have applied this doctrine since 1880, and the Supreme Court implicitly approved of the doctrine in 1924 in Westinghouse Electric. Applying the doctrine of assignor estoppel, however, both the district court and the U.S.
SCOTUSBlog
NOVEMBER 7, 2022
Talevski , to be argued Tuesday, returns the court to the question of when federal law is subject to private enforcement. The court will consider whether to overrule a line of precedent and to hold that private individuals cannot use 42 U.S.C. The district court dismissed the action, but the U.S. Arguments of HHC.
SCOTUSBlog
DECEMBER 10, 2021
In June 2020, the Supreme Court issued a summary reversal – meaning it decided the case without merits briefing or oral argument – in Andrus v. In an unsigned opinion, the court ruled that Terence Andrus had demonstrated that his lawyer provided deficient performance at sentencing for failing to investigate or introduce mitigating evidence.
SCOTUSBlog
MARCH 30, 2022
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court granted review on a case raising the question whether Andy Warhol paintings made using a copyrighted photograph were so “transformative” as to be a non-infringing “fair use.” Case in point: Texas v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
104 
Let's personalize your content