|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-1019||7th Cir.||Jan 13, 2015||Apr 29, 2015||9-0||Kagan||OT 2014|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.
Holding: A court may review whether the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission satisfied its statutory obligation to attempt conciliation before filing suit. But, because the EEOC has extensive discretion to determine what kind and amount of communication with an employer is appropriate in any given case, the scope of that review is narrow.
Judgment: Vacated and reamanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on April 29, 2015.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 25 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 27, 2014)|
|Mar 14 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Mar 19 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 28, 2014.|
|Mar 27 2014||Brief amici curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Apr 22 2014||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including May 27, 2014.|
|May 27 2014||Brief of respondent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed.|
|Jun 2 2014||Reply of petitioner Mach Mining, LLC filed.|
|Jun 3 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 19, 2014.|
|Jun 23 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2014.|
|Jun 30 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 7 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Aug 1 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 4, 2014.|
|Aug 1 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 27, 2014.|
|Sep 4 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Sep 4 2014||Brief of petitioner Mach Mining, LLC filed.|
|Sep 11 2014||Brief amici curiae of Equal Employment Advisory Council and Society for Human Resource Management filed.|
|Sep 11 2014||Brief amicus curiae of American Insurance Association filed.|
|Sep 11 2014||Brief amici curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Oct 27 2014||Brief of respondent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed.|
|Nov 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of Impact Fund, et al. filed.|
|Nov 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of Women's Rights Organizations and Individuals filed.|
|Nov 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of States of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Nov 21 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 13, 2015|
|Nov 26 2014||Reply of petitioner Mach Mining, LLC filed.|
|Dec 2 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 2 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 7th Circuit|
|Dec 2 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A. 7th Circuit. The record is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Jan 13 2015||Argued. For petitioner: Thomas C. Goldstein, Bethesda, Md. For respondents: Nicole A. Saharsky, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Apr 29 2015||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jun 1 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
NEW: The Supreme Court rules against the FTC in a dispute with a payday loan company over the extent of the FTC's authority to seek monetary restitution from companies engaged in deceptive practices. SCOTUS says 9-0 that FTC doesn't have that authority under the statute at issue.
NEW: The Supreme Court sides against the federal government and in favor of people who brought Social Security claims in a technical ruling about "exhaustion" rules (essentially, when in the bureaucratic process the claimants were required to raise certain legal arguments).
BREAKING: In 6-3 decision, SCOTUS declines to further limit the ability of states to sentence juveniles to life without parole. The court upholds the sentence of a Mississippi man who killed his grandfather when he was 15; says sentencing procedure did not violate 8th Amendment.
Supreme Court opinions in 15 minutes!
We’re LIVE right now discussing which opinions we could see today and answering your questions. Join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, April 22 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, April 22, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases. Th...
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
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.
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.