In a complaint filed directly with the U.S. Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction,[1] New Hampshire has sued Massachusetts for attempting to tax residents
The 13(b) dominoes are beginning to fall. Last week, a unanimous
AMG Court
found that Section 13(b) does not allow for monetary remedies. A
panel of the Ninth Circuit, in
Federal Trade Commission v.
Cardiff et al, quickly took that decision to heart.
In a brief, three-paragraph order, the
per curiam panel
vacated the district court s preliminary injunction order, that
had been entered into to preserve assets pending a final
judgment that could include equitable monetary relief in this
action under § 13(b) of the FTC. Because the
Supreme Court unanimously held that §13(b) as currently
written does not grant the Commission authority to obtain equitable
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Nearly every state allows federal courts to certify questions of
state law to obtain definitive answers from state supreme courts on
unsettled issues of state law. The United States
Supreme Court has explained that certifications saves time,
energy, and resources and helps build a cooperative judicial
federalism. All states, except North Carolina, have
rules or statutes allowing their highest court to accept certified
questions from federal courts on questions of state law.
Though federal courts decide unsettled questions of state law every
day, this procedure remains rarely used and it is especially
In
Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., Case No.
18–956, 593 U. S. (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court held
that Google s unauthorized copying of around 11,500 lines of
Oracle s computer code was a fair use and therefore not an
infringement.
Assuming, but expressly not deciding, that Oracle s copied
Java SE program code was copyrightable, the Supreme Court reversed
the Federal Circuit s most recent decision and held that
Google s copying was a permissible fair use. The Supreme
Court s decision placed particular emphasis on the nature of
the copied code, which was part of a user interface and therefore inherently bound together with both the uncopyrightable
self
It seems that everyone is taking a second look at SPACs as the
number of lawsuits against these alternative IPOs continues to
increase by the day. The SEC has recently commented on the liability risks of SPACs under
the securities laws following the agency s heightened
scrutiny of these blank-check companies. What exactly is happening,
and how can SPAC actors mitigate the ever-increasing risk of
litigation?
This latest episode of SPAC Chat features your two favorite
corporate attorneys in the forefront of SPACs, Jeff Schultz and Sahir Surmeli, along with two of Mintz s
leading litigators, Doug Baumstein and Sean Prosser, as they discuss this latest SPAC