McGucken v. Shutterstock, Inc., Case No. 23-7652 (2d Cir. 2026).
A websites removal and alteration of copyright management information did not satisfy the DMCA’s double‑scienter requirements under 17 U.S.C. § 1202(a)–(b) for files uploaded to its site, but the website operator must still prove the infringing activity did not occur “by reason of the storage at the direction of a user” and whether the operator had the “right and ability to control” such activity for purposes of the § 512(c) safe harbor.
Herlihy v. DBMP, LLC, Case No. 24-2109 (4th Cir. 2026).
Asbestos claimants failed to establish “cause” under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) to lift the automatic stay where the debtor sought to pursue a § 524(g) asbestos‑trust reorganization in good faith and qualified for that regime, and the Robbins factors favored maintaining the stay to protect the estate, preserve judicial economy, and ensure consistent treatment of present and future claimants.
Guzman v. Acuarius Night Club LLC, Case No. 24-1555 (4th Cir. 2026).
Rule 12(b)(6) authorizes dismissal only where the complaint itself fails to state a plausible claim, and accordingly, a district court may not grant a Rule 12(b)(6) motion “as unopposed” solely because the plaintiff failed to respond.
In re: O’Hara, Case No. 25-1203 (6th Cir. 2026).
A debtor’s failure to move to dismiss a Chapter 13 case before entry of an order converting the case to Chapter 7 extinguishes the debtor’s “absolute” right to dismissal under 11 U.S.C. § 1307(b).
Eaton Corp. v. Angstrom Automotive Group, LLC, Case No. 24-3604 (6th Cir. 2026).
Ohio Rev. Code § 1302.65(C)(1) adopts a lenient notice‑of‑breach standard under Chemtrol, permitting suit where the buyer’s timely communications reasonably alerted the seller that the transaction was “troublesome” without expressly alleging breach or threatening litigation.
