|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1657||1st Cir.||Feb 20, 2019||May 20, 2019||8-1||Kagan||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 petitioner in this case.
Holding: A bankruptcy debtor’s rejection of an executory contract under 11 U.S.C. §365 has the same effect as a breach of that contract outside bankruptcy; such an act thus cannot rescind rights that the contract previously granted.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on May 20, 2019. Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 27 2018||Application (17A1060) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 12, 2018 to June 11, 2018, submitted to Justice Breyer.|
|Apr 02 2018||Application (17A1060) granted by Justice Breyer extending the time to file until June 11, 2018.|
|Jun 11 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 12, 2018)|
|Jun 28 2018||Waiver of right of respondent Tempnology, LLC, n/k/a Old Cold LLC to respond filed.|
|Jul 03 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.|
|Jul 09 2018||Response Requested. (Due August 8, 2018)|
|Jul 11 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The International Trademark Association filed.|
|Jul 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 8, 2018 to September 7, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 24 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 7, 2018.|
|Aug 08 2018||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed.|
|Sep 07 2018||Brief of respondent Tempnology, LLC, n/k/a Old Cold LLC in opposition filed.|
|Sep 25 2018||Reply of petitioner Mission Product Holdings, Inc. filed.|
|Sep 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.|
|Oct 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.|
|Oct 25 2018||Letter of October 23, 2018 from counsel for respondent received. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2018||Letter of October 25, 2018 from counsel for petitioner received. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2018||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Dec 10 2018||Brief of petitioner Mission Product Holdings, Inc. filed.|
|Dec 10 2018||Joint appendix (2 volumes) filed.|
|Dec 12 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The International Trademark Association filed.|
|Dec 21 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, February 20, 2019.|
|Dec 21 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Jan 09 2019||Brief of respondent Tempnology, LLC, n/k/a Old Cold LLC filed.|
|Jan 11 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 1st Circuit.|
|Jan 15 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Jan 18 2019||Record from the U.S.C.A. 1st Circuit is electronic and located on PACER, with the exception of one envelop containing the Joint Appendix.|
|Jan 22 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Feb 08 2019||Reply of petitioner Mission Product Holdings, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 20 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Danielle Spinelli, Washington, D. C.; and Zachary D. Tripp, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, Washington, D. C.|
|May 20 2019||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Jun 21 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.