In Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger (No. 23-677), the Supreme Court resolved a jurisdictional dog fight over dog food. If a plaintiff files a complaint containing state- and federal-law claims, the complaint can ordinarily be removed to federal court, and that court will have jurisdiction to resolve all the claims. But what happens
Supreme Court Update: E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera (No. 23-217)
In E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera (No 23-217), the Supreme Court addressed a circuit split as to the evidentiary standard that applies when an employer argues that an employee is exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime-pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). A unanimous Court agreed with the majority of lower courts…
Supreme Court Update: NVIDIA Corp. v. E. Ohman J:Or Fonder AB (No. 23-970)
A few months ago, securities litigators viewed OT24 with excitement: The Court had granted cert in not one, but two cases addressing when a complaint adequately alleged securities fraud under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. No more: A few weeks ago, the Court took back the first of those grants, dismissing Facebook, Inc. v. …
Supreme Court Update: Bouarfa v. Mayorkas (No. 23-584)
This week saw the first “real” decision of the term (that is, an opinion in an argued case), a unanimous affirmance in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas (No. 23-583), holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary decision of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to revoke an approved visa petition based on a…
Supreme Court Update: Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank (No. 23-980)
Before the Thanksgiving holiday, the Court issued its first “decision” in one of the 46 cases (so far) that make up its OT24 term. But just like last year, this year’s first decision was more of a decision not to decide: In Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank (No. 23-980), the Court dismissed the…