July 16, 2020 - Appellate & Supreme Court, FTC

U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision to Review a Pair of FTCA Cases Could Spell a Sea Change in FTC’s Enforcement Authority

The 1914 Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA) created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or “the Commission”) and empowered it to prevent, and provide redress to consumers affected by, unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. In …›

California Supreme Court: Civil Penalty Claims Brought by Government Under UCL and FAL Should Be Determined by Court—Not Jury

The California Supreme Court has confirmed that claims for civil penalties brought by government entities under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”)[1] and False Advertising Law (“FAL”)[2] should be decided by a judge—not a jury. See Nationwide Biweekly Administration Inc. et al. v. Superior Court …›

Start Your Engines: The U.S. Supreme Court Will Yet Again Review the Constitutional Limits of Personal Jurisdiction in a Pair of Cases Involving Ford Motor Company

Lower courts’ inability or refusal to confine cases to their proper fora compels the Supreme Court to spend precious docket space restating the rules governing personal jurisdiction. The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments limit courts’ authority to exercise personal jurisdiction over …›

Ninth Circuit’s En Banc Hyundai Decision: Less Strict Standard For Settlement Classes

On June 7, 2019, an en banc Ninth Circuit panel affirmed certification of a nationwide settlement class and held, 8-3, that class certification criteria are applied less strictly in a settlement context.[1] Hyundai II preserves the ability to certify nationwide settlement classes while …›

Supreme Court Decides Prescription Drug Preemption Case in Favor of Drug Manufacturer

The United States Supreme Court finally clarified its 11-year-old “clear evidence” standard for pharmaceutical preemption. In its much-anticipated opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court unanimously reversed the Third Circuit’s holding that questions of pharmaceutical preemption should be decided by juries. Merck …›

Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela: The Supreme Court Clarifies that Clear Consent is Necessary for Class Arbitration

The Supreme Court’s decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela made it clear that an arbitration agreement must explicitly contemplate and provide for class arbitration, building on a line of pro-arbitration rulings from the Supreme Court over the past decade, including American Express Co. …›