|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-457||9th Cir.||Mar 21, 2017||Jun 12, 2017||8-0||Ginsburg||OT 2016|
Holding: Federal courts of appeals lack jurisdiction under 28 U. S. C. §1291 to review an order denying class certification (or, as in this case, an order striking class allegations) after the named plaintiffs have voluntarily dismissed their claims with prejudice.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on June 12, 2017. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito joined. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 9 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 12, 2015)|
|Oct 28 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 14, 2015.|
|Oct 28 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Nov 11 2015||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Nov 12 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. filed.|
|Nov 12 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Nov 12 2015||Brief amicus curiae of DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar filed.|
|Dec 14 2015||Brief of respondents Seth Baker, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 22 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 8, 2016.|
|Dec 22 2015||Reply of petitioner Microsoft Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 15, 2016.|
|Jan 15 2016||Petition GRANTED limited to the following Question: Whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction under both Article III and 28 U. S. C. §1291 to review an order denying class certification after the named plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss their individual claims with prejudice.|
|Feb 23 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents.|
|Mar 2 2016||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including March 11, 2016.|
|Mar 2 2016||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including May 16, 2016.|
|Mar 11 2016||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received.)|
|Mar 11 2016||Brief of petitioner Microsoft Corporation filed.|
|Mar 17 2016||Brief amicus curiae of DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar filed.|
|Mar 17 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed.|
|Mar 18 2016||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Mar 18 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. filed.|
|Mar 18 2016||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Mar 18 2016||Brief amici curiae of Civil Procedure Scholars filed.|
|May 16 2016||Brief of respondents Seth Baker, et al. filed.|
|May 23 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Public Justice, P.C. filed.|
|May 23 2016||Brief amici curiae of Complex Litigation Law Professors filed.|
|May 23 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Public Citizen, Inc. filed.|
|Jun 15 2016||Reply of petitioner Microsoft Corporation filed.|
|Feb 3 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, March 21, 2017|
|Feb 3 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Feb 6 2017||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER. Also received SEALED pleadings.|
|Feb 9 2017||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 21 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For respondents: Peter K. Stris, Los Angeles, Cal.|
|Jun 12 2017||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, J., joined. Gorsuch, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Jul 14 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
We’ve gotten roughly half of the merits opinions for the term so far. Kavanaugh is trending as the median justice and appears to be supplanting Roberts.
Of course, that could all change by June. Here’s the first in a series on interim stats from the term.
On a new, conservative court, Kavanaugh sits at the center - SCOTUSblog
This article is the first in a series on interim statistics from the 2020-21 Supreme Court term. The Supreme Cou...
The Supreme Court will release orders and opinion(s?) on Monday May 17.
Order list at 9:30 a.m. EDT. Opinions at 10:00.
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
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.