Mar 12 2026
9th Cir. 5:22-cv-08861- Published

NETCHOICE, LLC v. ROB BONTA, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's preliminary injunction against the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act because the challenger failed to develop a record proving the law's coverage definition applies to every application in a constitutionally problematic way. However, the court affirmed the injunction against specific data use and dark patterns restrictions, ruling they are unconstitutionally vague, and remanded the severability question for further analysis.

Mar 11 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-1243 Panel Decision

THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK v. GEN DIGITAL INC

The Federal Circuit vacated the patent infringement judgment against Gen Digital, ruling that the asserted software claims were directed to an abstract idea under the first step of the Alice analysis. The court also held that damages based on foreign sales were impermissible under U.S. patent law and ordered a reconsideration of enhanced damages and attorney fees.

Mar 2 2026
3rd Cir. 24-3311 Panel Decision

R. S., by and through his parents; M. S.; N. S., in their own right v. EAST BRUNSWICK SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court's grant of summary judgment for the East Brunswick School District, holding that the district provided a Free Appropriate Public Education to a student with Down Syndrome. The court ruled that placing the student in a self-contained classroom for specific subjects was necessary because he could not be educated satisfactorily in a general education setting despite extensive supplementary supports.

Feb 19 2026
11th Cir. 1:20-cv-01771-JPB Published

C.B. by and through K.B. and S.B. v. Henry County School District

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that a school district complied with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by moving a student with Down syndrome from one special education class to another. However, the court reversed the lower court's dismissal of the case as moot regarding the student's alternative assessment placement and ordered a remand for further proceedings.

Mar 4 2026
U.S. Sup. Ct. 24-1021 Unanimous

Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp.

The Supreme Court held that the New Jersey Transit Corporation is not an arm of the State entitled to sovereign immunity. The Court ruled that despite its public functions and state control, NJ Transit's corporate structure and independent liability shield it from the State's immunity.

Oct 8 2025
9th Cir. 3:23-cv-00528- Published

L.B., By and Through his Guardian Ad Litem ROBIN MORRISEY v. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court ruling that held a school district had no duty to offer a free appropriate public education because parents requested an IEP meeting rather than an IEP document. The panel clarified that the purpose of an IEP meeting is to develop and offer an IEP, making the specific terminology used by parents irrelevant to the district's obligation.

Jun 20 2025
5th Cir. 24-30706 Panel Decision

Roake v. Brumley

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction blocking a Louisiana statute requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments. The court held that the statute violates the Establishment Clause and that the plaintiffs have standing to challenge it.

Sep 23 2024
2nd Cir. 23-540 Panel Decision

Rubin v. O'Malley

The Second Circuit vacated the district court's affirmation of a Social Security Administration denial, holding that the Administrative Law Judge's decision was not supported by substantial evidence. The court found the ALJ misinterpreted medical and lay evidence regarding the plaintiff's ability to adapt to environmental changes.

Sep 4 2024
2nd Cir. 23-1260 Panel Decision

Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive

The Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for four major book publishers, ruling that Internet Archive's practice of scanning and lending entire copyrighted books violates the Copyright Act. The court held that this digital lending program fails the fair use test because it is not transformative and usurps the publishers' market for licensed eBooks.