|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-690||3d Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2012|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondent in this case, which is listed without regard to the likelihood that it will be granted.
Issue: Whether the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(2), establishes a cause of action for private insurers operating Medicare Advantage plans to sue tortfeasors for double damages.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 19 2012||Application (12A399) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 4, 2012 to December 5, 2012, submitted to Justice Alito.|
|Oct 19 2012||Application (12A399) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until December 5, 2012.|
|Dec 5 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 7, 2013)|
|Dec 20 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including February 6, 2013.|
|Jan 4 2013||Brief amici curiae of Plaintiffs' Advisory Committee in Avandia MDL No.1871 filed.|
|Jan 4 2013||Brief amici curiae of MARC Coalition, et al. filed.|
|Jan 7 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America filed.|
|Jan 7 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Jan 7 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Alliance of Aurtomobile Manufacturers filed.|
|Jan 7 2013||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies filed.|
|Jan 31 2013||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including March 8, 2013.|
|Mar 8 2013||Brief of respondents Humana Medical Plans, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|Mar 19 2013||Reply of petitioners GlaxoSmithKline, et al. filed.|
|Mar 20 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 12, 2013.|
|Apr 15 2013||Petition DENIED.|
In yet another Friday night shadow docket order, a divided Supreme Court sides with challengers to California’s COVID-related restrictions. Brief per curiam opinion and dissent from Justice Kagan: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
By vote of 5-4, #SCOTUS blocks California's COVID-related restrictions on in-home prayer meetings and worship. Opinion & Kagan's dissent are here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
President Biden will sign an executive order authorizing a commission to study Supreme Court reform. The commission will review “the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court” among other topics.
President Biden to Sign Executive Order Creating the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States | The White House
President Biden will today issue an executive order forming the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States, comprised of a
The Supreme Court will hear April and May oral arguments remotely but with a live audio feed.
#SCOTUS confirms that "[i]n keeping with public health guidance in response to COVID-19," it will hear oral arguments in April and on May 4 remotely, as it has for the other argument sessions this term. Press release here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Media-Advisory-Teleconference-Arguments.pdf
In a Monday evening shadow-docket filing, Tennessee asks the Supreme Court to reinstate a state law that imposes a 48-hour waiting period for patients to abortions. A federal judge struck down the waiting period as unconstitutional. @AHoweBlogger explains:
Tennessee asks court to restore waiting period for abortions - SCOTUSblog
Tennessee filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court on Monday, asking the justices for permission to enforce...
BREAKING: In major copyright battle between tech giants, SCOTUS sides w/ Google over Oracle, finding that Google didnt commit copyright infringement when it reused lines of code in its Android operating system. The code came from Oracle's JAVA SE platform. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
NEW: The Supreme Court agrees to take up one new case, Brown v. Davenport. It's a technical but important question about the standard for federal courts reviewing habeas claims to assess whether constitutional violations were "harmless error." https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/040521zor_3204.pdf
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.