Jump to Navigation

Legal News

Case Summaries

Commercial Law

[06/21] Monster, LLC v. Beats Electronics, LLC
In a petition for writ of mandate in an underlying tort action in which Monster alleged that Beats Electronics engaged in fraud to deprive them of interest in the company, and the headphone manufacturer filed cross-claims for breach of contract and argued that the court, rather than a jury, could determine the amount of damages, the petition is granted where defendant is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of attorney's fees.

[06/21] Stadnick v. Vivint Solar, Inc.
In a securities class action complaint, the plaintiff wanted the court to apply a 1st Circuit test for financial disclosures and argued they were misled by the company, but the Court of Appeals declined to adopt the 1st Circuit test and concluded the shareholders were not misled, affirming the district court's decision.

[06/21] The Park at Cross Creek v. City of Malibu
In an action by a real estate developer seeking to strike down a voter initiative designed to limit developments, the trial court's decision is affirmed where the measure at issue exceeded the initiative power and was illegal.

[06/20] SJJC Aviation Services v. City of San Jose
In a case involving an airport lease and operating agreement, brought by a company alleging that the city had a flawed bidding process, the trial court's denial of plaintiff's leave to amend its petition and complaint is affirmed.

Read More

Immigration Law

[06/12] State of Hawaii v. Trump
In an appeal involving the statutory and constitutional limits to the President's power to control immigration specifically in Executive Order 13780, 'Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States', the district court's order preliminarily enjoining Sections 2 and 6 of the Executive Order is affirmed where: 1) the President, in issuing the Executive Order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress; 2) the President must make a sufficient finding that the entry of specified classes of people would be 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'; and 3) the Executive Order runs afoul of other provisions of the INA that prohibit nationality-based discrimination and require the President to follow a specific process when setting the annual cap on the admission of refugees.

[06/12] Sessions v. Morales-Santana
In a case challenging the Immigration and Nationality Act's framework for U.S. citizenship from birth by a child born abroad, when one parent is a U. S. citizen and the other a citizen of another nation, the Second Circuit's decision reversing the BIA and holding unconstitutional the differential treatment of unwed mothers and fathers in section 1409, is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) the gender line Congress drew is incompatible with the Fifth Amendment's requirement that the Government accord to all persons 'the equal protection of the laws'; and 2) because this Court is not equipped to convert section 1409(c)'s exception for unwed U.S.-citizen mothers into the main rule displacing sections 1401(a)(7) and 1409(a), it falls to Congress to select a uniform prescription that neither favors nor disadvantages any person on the basis of gender.

[06/12] Serrano-Alberto v. Attorney General US
In a case to clarify our case law and to demarcate the boundaries of the Fifth Amendment right to due process owed to aliens in removal hearings, a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) is granted where the Immigration Judge denied petitioner this fundamental right by actively preventing him from making his case for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

[06/08] Williams v. US
In a petition for writ of error coram nobis brought by a petitioner who was convicted of making a material false statement in a matter within the jurisdiction of the U.S. government in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 100, seeking to remedy the collateral consequences of this conviction on his immigration status and to leave open the possibility that he could obtain a green card and remain in the U.S., the district court's denial of a writ of error coram nobis is affirmed where petitioner cannot satisfy this difficult standard to obtain such relief.

Read More

International Law

[05/22] Water Splash, Inc. v. Menon
In an employer's Texas state court action against a former employee who resided in Canada, alleging that defendant had begun working for a competitor while still employed by plaintiff, the Texas Court of Appeals' decision reversing the trial court's denial of defendant's motion to set aside the default judgment on the ground that she had not been properly served, is vacated where the Hague Service Convention does not prohibit service of process by mail.

[05/01] Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela v. Helmerich & Payne Int'l Drilling Co.
In a suit involving the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. section 1604, brought by an American parent company of a Venezuelan subsidiary that supplied oil rigs to oil development entities, alleging that Venezuela had unlawfully expropriated the subsidiary's rigs by nationalizing them, the D.C. Circuit's decision that the claims fell within the expropriation exception is vacated where: 1) the nonfrivolous-argument standard is not consistent with the FSIA; 2) a case falls within the scope of the expropriation exception only if the property in which the party claims to hold rights was indeed 'property taken in violation of international law'; and 3) a court should decide the foreign sovereign's immunity defense '[a]t the threshold' of the action, Verlinden B. V. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, 461 U. S. 480, 493, resolving any factual disputes as near to the outset of the case as is reasonably possible.

[03/08] Padilla v. Troxell
In a petition under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11,670, 19 I.L.M. 1501, as implemented by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA), 22 U.S.C. section 9001 et seq., seeking the return of petitioner's child after she was taken to the U.S. by her father, the district court's denial of the petition is affirmed where although petitioner established that child was wrongfully removed, the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that petitioner consented to father's removal of child from Mexico to the United States.

[03/03] Muchira v. Al-Rawaf
In a suit brought by a Kenyan plaintiff who worked as a domestic servant, alleging that her employer, a Saudi family, forced her to provide labor in violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), 18 U.S.C. section 1589 the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where plaintiff has failed to present sufficient evidence that the Saudi family knowingly coerced her into providing her labor and services 'by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or legal process,' 18 U.S.C. section 1589(a)(3).

Read More

International Trade

[05/30] Maverick Tube Corp. v. US
In an appeal of the International Trade court's decision sustaining the determination of the U.S. Department of Commerce on remand to apply adverse facts available (AFA) after defendant did not report input purchases for two of its steel mills, the Trade Court decision is affirmed where Commerce's application of AFA to defendant is supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with law.

[05/30] Suntec Industries Co., Ltd. v. US
In an appeal arising from the U.S. Department of Commerce's third administrative review of its antidumping-duty order covering certain steel nails from China, the Court of International Trade's denial of plaintiff's suit to set aside the results of the review is affirmed where the Federal Register notice of initiation of the review constituted notice to plaintiff as a matter of law and fully enabled plaintiff to participate in the review because plaintiff did not show any prejudice from not knowing of the request in the pre-initiation period.

[05/25] US v. Am. Home Assurance Co.
In an appeal arising from four collection actions in which the government sought to recover unpaid antidumping duties from a surety, the Court of International Trade's judgment on the pleadings holding that the government is not entitled to non-statutory equitable interest for unpaid antidumping duties for imported goods, is affirmed where Trade Court did not abuse its discretion in declining to award the government equitable prejudgment interest on top of 19 U.S.C. section 580 interest or in declining to permit defendant to make a deposit in an interest-bearing account.

[05/23] Rivera v. Int'l Trade Commission
In an appeal from a divided decision by the International Trade Commission, finding no violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. section 1337, based on the Commission's holding of invalidity of certain asserted claims of appellant's patent that describes single-brew coffee machines, the Commission's decision is affirmed where substantial evidence supports the Commission's holding that all asserted claims are invalid for lack of written description.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.