|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-459||9th Cir.||Apr 15, 2019||Apr 23, 2019||N/A||Per Curiam||OT 2018|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit correctly held, in express disagreement with five other courts of appeals, that Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 supports an inferred private right of action based on the negligent misstatement or omission made in connection with a tender offer.
Judgment: The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted in a per curiam opinion on April 23, 2019.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 11 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 13, 2018)|
|Oct 16 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 13, 2018 to November 30, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 18 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 30, 2018.|
|Nov 13 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association filed.|
|Nov 13 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Nov 30 2018||Brief of respondents Gary Varjabedian, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 18 2018||Reply of petitioners Emulex Corporation, et al. filed.|
|Dec 19 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Jan 04 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 06 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, Gary Varjabedian, et al.|
|Feb 11 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 15, 2019|
|Feb 19 2019||Joint appendix (2 volumes) filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Feb 19 2019||Brief of petitioners Emulex Corporation, et al. filed.|
|Feb 25 2019||Brief amici curiae of Former Commissioners of the Securities and Exchange Commission filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and Business Roundtable filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of neither party filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Phillip Goldstein filed.|
|Mar 20 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 21 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Mar 21 2019||Brief of respondents Gary Varjabedian, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 22 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 28 2019||Brief amicus curiae of North American Securities Administrators Association, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2019||Brief amici curiae of Institutional Investors filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2019||Brief amici curiae of Legal Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 01 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 08 2019||Reply of petitioners Emulex Corporation, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 15 2019||Argued. For petitioners: Gregory G. Garre, Bethesda, Md. For United States, as amicus curiae: Morgan L. Ratner, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex.|
|Apr 23 2019||Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. Opinion per curiam.|
|May 28 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.