Ripple Analytics Inc. v. People Center, Inc., Case No. 24-490 (2nd Cir. 2025).
Trademark ownership is a necessary element of a trademark infringement claim. A plaintiff who does not own the mark is not the real party in interest and will have its trademark infringement claim dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17.
Sudakow v. CleanChoice Energy, Inc., Case No. 24-1988 (2nd Cir. 2025).
A defendant cannot compel arbitration based on terms sent weeks after contract formation and cannot claim consent through inquiry notice where the later sent arbitration provision was not presented in a clear and conspicuous manner.
Ransom v. GreatPlains Finance, LLC, Case No. 24-1908 (3rd Cir. 2025).
A tribally owned lender is not an arm of the tribe entitled to sovereign immunity where - despite the tribe's control over the entity - a judgment against the lender would not immediately affect tribal revenue.
In re Insight Terminal Solutions, LLC, Case No. 24-5222 (6th Cir. 2025).
A bankruptcy court commits reversible legal error by categorically excluding deposition testimony that lacks a cross-examination opportunity, as the court possesses discretion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a) to admit such testimony.
Kloosterman v. Metropolitan Hospital, Case No. 24-1398 (6th Cir. 2025).
Defendants forfeit their right to arbitrate under the Federal Arbitration Act by seeking a complete judicial victory through dispositive motions before invoking arbitration.
Popa v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 24-14 (9th Cir. 2025).
A plaintiff alleging website session-replay technology violations lacks Article III standing where - despite the existence of statutory violations - plaintiff fails to demonstrate concrete injury analogous to traditional privacy torts.
Ruiz v. The Bradford Exchange, Ltd., Case No. 24-3378 (9th Cir. 2025).
District courts possess the authority to remand removed cases to state court for lack of equitable jurisdiction, but defendants may maintain federal jurisdiction by waiving their adequate-remedy-at-law defense.
Searle v. Allen, Case No. 24-4819 (9th Cir. 2025).
The Rooker-Feldman Doctrine bars federal claims directly challenging state foreclosure judgments but, after the Supreme Court's decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County, does not preclude claims for post-judgment retention of surplus equity.
ECB USA, Inc. v. Savencia Cheese USA, LLC, Case No. 23-12580 (11th Cir. 2025).
Personal jurisdiction cannot be established through defendants' communications with plaintiffs' Florida-based attorney or the attorney accessing a digital “deal room” in Florida because such contact constitutes unilateral activity by plaintiffs that fails to create minimum contacts with the forum state.
