Samsung’s Aug. 11 motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ July 14 first amended consolidated complaint in the multidistrict litigation arising from the 2022 data breach, and the memorandum in law in support of that motion, “are legally and factually infirm,” and the motion should be denied, said the plaintiffs’ opposition Friday (docket 1:23-md-03055) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Camden.
New York’s hateful conduct law (Section 394-ccc) “intrudes on websites’ First Amendment rights in a pernicious way,” by using “vague terms” to define hate speech, and forces covered websites to publish a policy explaining how they will respond to and address complaints about that speech, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman and TechFreedom in an amicus brief Monday (docket 23-356) in the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals. They support the affirmation of the district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction blocking New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) from enforcing the law.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a surprise order Tuesday (docket 23-30445), withdrew its order of the previous day granting the petition of the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri for rehearing to reinstate federal officials from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the State Department to the social media injunction imposed on the White House, the surgeon general’s office, the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (see 2309240002).
The plaintiffs in the four consolidated cases that comprise the multidistrict litigation challenging Google’s alleged monopolization of the Google Play Store seek “a relatively modest” non-monetary remedy in the form of an “adverse inference instruction” to the jury to sanction Google for failing to preserve evidentiary messages on its internal chat system, said their proposal Thursday (docket 3:21-cv-05227) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco.
Ocean City, New Jersey, denies U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Camden, has subject matter jurisdiction over Verizon’s claims because its action wasn’t commenced in a timely manner, said the city’s answer Friday (docket 1:23-cv-04370). Verizon alleges the city violated Section 704 of the Communications Act by effectively prohibiting Verizon’s provision of personal wireless services and because it denied the application without substantial evidence contained in the written record, it said (see 2308140028).
The Democratic attorneys general of 21 states, plus the District of Columbia, think the Chevron “framework” strikes an “appropriate balance” between confining agencies to parameters set by Congress, and “allowing them to operate effectively within those parameters,” said their U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Friday (docket 22-451).
The Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri want the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to “reinstate” officials from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the State Department to the social media injunction imposed on the White House, the surgeon general’s office, the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (see 2309110001), said the AGs’ petition for panel rehearing Friday (docket 23-30445).
Defendant Apollo Interactive seeks an order dismissing plaintiff Eric Moorman’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action in its entirety and to compel Moorman’s claims to arbitration, said its motion Thursday (docket 8:23-cv-01533) in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Tampa. The court alternatively should stay the case pending the outcome of the arbitration, and should also strike or dismiss Moorman’s class allegations, said the motion.
The AFL-CIO supports the government’s calls for the U.S. Supreme Court to preserve Chevron, rather than overturn it, said the union’s amicus brief Friday (docket 22-451) in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The AFL-CIO believes the doctrine “is both a constitutionally permissible and practically necessary part of a functional system of government,” it said.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals “affirmed a sweeping and unprecedented injunction” when it sought to bar officials from the White House, surgeon general’s office, the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from applying what the court called “coercion” on social media companies to moderate their content, said Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in a reply brief Thursday at the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday (docket 23A243) in support of the government’s application for a full stay of the injunction, pending SCOTUS review (see 2309140041).