ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

Justices inclined to respect corporate identity in trademark dispute

The justices showed little appetite for breaking new ground when they heard argument on Wednesday in Dewberry Group v. Dewberry Engineers, a long-running dispute between similarly named groups of real-estate companies. The question before them is whether to uphold the judgment of a lower court that awarded damages for profits earned not only by the entity named as a defendant in the lawsuit, but also by several other entities that were not parties to the litigation.

From the earliest moment of argument by Thomas Hungar, representing the Dewberry Group’s effort to limit the damage award, it seemed clear that none of the justices were interested in affirming the lower court’s decision. The question, rather, was how much they would say beyond a succinct expression of disagreement.

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Thursday, Dec. 12

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Thursday morning read:

• US Supreme Court dismisses Nvidia’s bid to avoid securities fraud suit (John Kruzel, Reuters)
• Supreme Court Allows Biden Plan to Address Toxic Coal Ash (Adam Liptak, The New York Times)
• William Hennessy, a veteran sketch artist who brought courtroom scenes to the nation, has died (John Fritze & Katelyn Polantz, CNN)
• Supreme Court allows investor lawsuit against chipmaker Nvidia (Justin Jouvenal, The Washington Post)
• Outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin pushes constitutional amendment for Supreme Court term limits (Alex Swoyer, The Washington Times)

EMERGENCY DOCKET

Supreme Court turns down Kentucky utility’s request to block EPA coal ash rule

The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a request from a Kentucky utility company to temporarily block an Environmental Protection Agency rule governing the disposal of coal ash while a challenge to it moves forward in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The denial came just under six months after the Supreme Court, in Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, granted a plea from three states (as well as several companies and trade groups) to put on hold an EPA rule intended to reduce air pollution from power plants and other industrial facilities. Since then, however, the justices have turned down several other requests to temporarily block EPA rules while litigation continues in the lower courts.

OPINION ANALYSIS

Supreme Court dismisses NVIDIA’s securities fraud appeal

The justices on Wednesday dismissed a dispute over a securities fraud case brought against graphics chip maker NVIDIA. Shareholders argued that NVIDIA did not disclose the extent to which sales to crypto-miners, rather than gaming companies, put their shares at risk. The court heard NVIDIA Corp v. E. Ohman J:or Fonder AB just last month, but the dismissal was no surprise. The most dominant theme of the argument was repeated comments by justices that the dispute was too fact specific to warrant their attention.

The specific question in the case was whether the complaint in this case was sufficiently specific to make out an allegation of fraud under the high pleading standard for securities fraud actions under the Private Securities Legal Reform Act. Now the case will go back to the trial court to allow the investors to attempt to prove their case against NVIDIA. This is a substantial defeat for NVIDIA, which understandably had good reason to hope the justices would reverse the lower court decision once they agreed to hear the case.

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Wednesday, Dec. 11

We expect one or more opinions from the court again this morning, beginning at 10 a.m. EST. Follow us on Bluesky and TikTok for live coverage. The justices will then hear oral arguments in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers, Inc. The case is a dispute over damages for trademark infringement. The lower court held the Dewberry Group liable for damages based on profits earned by affiliated entities not involved in the lawsuit on the theory that they could be regarded as a single collective enterprise. The question is whether the damages should be limited to profits earned by the defendants that were joined as parties in the litigation.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read:

• Supreme Court divided over government contracting fraud conviction (Ann E. Marimow, The Washington Post)
• Supreme Court Poised to Curb Scope of Environmental Reviews (Adam Liptak, The New York Times)
• Biden admin tells Supreme Court to stay out of climate lawsuits (Lesley Clark, E&E News)
• Parental Rights May Be Only Path to Save Gender-Affirming Care (Hila Keren, Bloomberg Law)
• Joe Manchin’s support for Supreme Court reform is a sign (Ryan Teague Beckwith, MSNBC)