Willamette Law Online

(6 summaries)

Heather Parker

United States Supreme Court

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Patents: When reviewing a district court’s analysis of factual matters made in advocation of a patent claim, a court must apply a “clear error” instead of a de novo standard. (01-20-2015)

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Mata v. HolderImmigration: Whether the Fifth Circuit erred in determining that it had no jurisdiction to review a petitioner's request that the Board of Immigration Appeals equitably toll a deadline on his motion to reopen due to ineffective assistance of counsel under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).(01-16-2015)
Toca v. LouisianaSentencing: (1) Whether the rule announced in Miller v. Alabama that states that a mandatory life sentence without parole for those under 18 years of age violates the 8th Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment applies retroactively, and (2) Whether a federal question is raised by a claim that a state court failed to find a Teague exception.(12-12-2014)
Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc.First Amendment: (1) Whether state issued license plates, and the messages on them, are government speech, and thus immune from viewpoint neutrality; and (2) whether Sons of Confederate Veterans license plates were discriminated against on the basis of viewpoint when the state rejected them, even though the confederacy was not portrayed negatively.(12-05-2014)
Michigan v. EPA; consolidated with Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA; National Mining Association v. EPAEnvironmental Law: Whether it was unreasonable for the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") refused to consider costs in deciding if it is "appropriate" to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities.(11-25-2014)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.Employment Law: Whether it is a violation of Title VII for refusing to hire an applicant or for terminating an employee based on a religious practice that require accommodations. (10-02-2014)