Breaking News

City of Oakland, California v. Oakland Raiders

Pending petition
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
21-1243 9th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to SCOTUSblog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.

Issue: Whether a court may deny a plaintiff with an antitrust injury proximately caused by a defendant’s antitrust violation a Clayton Act cause of action based on a multifactor, prudential balancing test of “antitrust standing.”

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Feb 17 2022Application (21A438) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 2, 2022 to April 1, 2022, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Feb 22 2022Application (21A438) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until April 1, 2022.
Mar 10 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 13, 2022)
Apr 11 2022Brief amicus curiae of Open Markets Institute filed.
Apr 12 2022Brief amicus curiae of Ruth Henricks filed.
Apr 13 2022Waiver of right of respondent Oakland Raiders, et al. to respond filed.
Apr 13 2022Brief amici curiae of Sports Economists filed.
Apr 20 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/12/2022.
Apr 26 2022Response Requested. (Due May 26, 2022)
May 16 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 26, 2022 to June 27, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
May 17 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 27, 2022.