|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-375||2d Cir.||Apr 25, 2016||Jun 16, 2016||8-0||Kagan||OT 2015|
Holding: (1) When deciding whether to award attorney's fees under the Copyright Act’s fee-shifting provision, a district court should give substantial weight to the objective reasonableness of the losing party's position, while still taking into account all other circumstances relevant to granting fees; and (2) while the Second Circuit properly calls for district courts to give "substantial weight" to the reasonableness of a losing party's litigating positions, its language at times suggests that a finding of reasonableness raises a presumption against granting fees, and that goes too far in cabining the district court's analysis.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 16, 2016.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 13 2015||Application (15A170) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 25, 2015 to September 24, 2015, submitted to Justice Ginsburg.|
|Aug 17 2015||Application (15A170) granted by Justice Ginsburg extending the time to file until September 24, 2015.|
|Sep 24 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 28, 2015)|
|Oct 5 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 27, 2015.|
|Nov 24 2015||Brief of respondent John Wiley & Sons, Inc. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 27 2015||Letter of Rule 29.6 corporate disclosure statement received from counsel for respondent.|
|Dec 8 2015||Reply of petitioner Supap Kirtsaing, dba Bluechristine99 filed. (Distributed).|
|Dec 9 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 8, 2016.|
|Jan 11 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 15, 2016.|
|Jan 15 2016||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 11 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Feb 11 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Feb 22 2016||Joint appendix filed. (Statment of costs filed.)|
|Feb 22 2016||Brief of petitioner Supap Kirtsaeng, dba Bluechristine99 filed.|
|Feb 29 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Public Knowledge filed.|
|Mar 4 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, April 25, 2016|
|Mar 7 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Mar 7 2016||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Mar 14 2016||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.|
|Mar 15 2016||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 16 2016||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit is electronic.|
|Mar 23 2016||Brief of respondent John Wiley & Sons, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Rimini Street, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2016||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 30 2016||Brief amicus curiae of The Copyright Alliance filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 8 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 11 2016||Reply of petitioner Supap Kirtsaeng, dba Bluechristine99 filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 25 2016||Argued. For petitioner: E. Joshua Rosenkranz, New York, N. Y. For respondent: Paul M. Smith, Washington, D. C.; and Elaine J. Goldenberg, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Jun 16 2016||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jul 18 2016||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.