This Week At The Ninth: Exemption From Exchange Act Liability
Welcome to Left Coast Appeals
At Left Coast Appeals, we provide insights into all things Ninth Circuit. Check out our Ninth Circuit Statistics page, which offers an empirical window into the Court’s workings. At our En Banc Tracker, we monitor the Court’s busy en banc proceedings. And at This Week at the Ninth, we highlight key recent decisions.
Follow us on Twitter @LeftCoastAppeal. And check out our sister blog Federal Circuitry, which takes a data-driven look at the Federal Circuit.
- This week, the Ninth Circuit addresses the requirements for invoking a regulatory exemption to liability under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ROTH v. FORIS VENTURES, LLC The Court holds that Rule 16b-3 exempts securities transactions approved by the issuer’s board of... ›
This Week At The Ninth: Infotainment and Drydocks
By: James R. Sigel
This week, the Ninth Circuit addresses the distinction between Article III and statutory standing, and it considers issues arising from the sinking of a drydock in a marine sanctuary. JONES v. FORD MOTOR CO. The Court holds that Plaintiffs pleaded an injury-in-fact for purposes... ›This Week At The Ninth: Voting Machines and Hunting Rights
By: James R. Sigel and Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers a plaintiff’s standing to challenge the use of voting machines and interprets a treaty granting an Indian Tribe the right to hunt. LAKE v. FONTES The Court holds that plaintiffs’ allegations that voting machines might be hacked in... ›This Week At The Ninth: Appellate Standing
By: Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers when an unnamed plaintiff in a putative class action has standing to appeal. MARK HABELT AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSISSIPPI V. IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ET AL. The Court holds that an initial plaintiff in a putative... ›This Week At The Ninth: Arbitration
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers whether a receiver in an SEC enforcement action is bound by an arbitration agreement signed by the receivership entity. GEOFF WINKLER V. THOMAS D. MCCLOSKEY, ET AL. The Court holds that a receiver is bound by arbitration agreements... ›This Week At The Ninth: The Public Interest Exemption to California’s Anti-SLAPP Law
By: Joel F. Wacks and Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit affirms the district court’s denial of a special motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, with two of the judges on the panel questioning the Court’s precedent holding that such orders are appealable in the first place. MARTINEZ v.... ›This Week At The Ninth: Personal Jurisdiction and Forest Fires
By: Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers personal jurisdiction in a trademark declaratory judgment action and assesses an agency’s decision to omit an environmental-impact statement in connection with a forest-fire-management project. IMPOSSIBLE FOODS, INC. v. IMPOSSIBLE X LLC The Court holds that the district court... ›This Week At The Ninth: COVID
By: James R. Sigel and Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers whether COVID-testing providers have a private right of action for reimbursement and addresses a landlord’s standing to challenge a COVID-related eviction moratorium. SALOOJAS, INC. v. AETNA HEALTH OF CALIFORNIA, INC. The Court holds that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief,... ›This Week At The Ninth: ERISA and FERC
By: Joel F. Wacks
This week, the Ninth Circuit considers ERISA claims alleging that a plan administrator unlawfully utilized internal guidelines more stringent than the terms of plaintiffs’ plans and the statute of limitations for an action by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. WIT v. UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH... ›This Week At The Ninth: Turbines and Protein
By: James R. Sigel and Alexandra Avvocato
This week, the Ninth Circuit tackles two issues of regulatory interpretation, addressing the Federal Aviation Administration’s rules governing challenges to “no hazard” determinations and the Food and Drug Administration’s rules governing protein-content claims. BACKCOUNTRY AGAINST DUMPS v. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION The Court holds that... ›