Arguments for the 2013 Term of the Supreme Court of the United States began today. Last week the Court granted review in eight cases:
Harris v. Quinn, Gov. of IL, No. 11-681: 1. May a State, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, compel personal care providers to accept and financially support a private organization as their exclusive representative to petition the State for greater reimbursements from its Medicaid programs? 2. Did the lower court err in holding that the claims of providers in the Home Based Support Services Program are not ripe for judicial review?
Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Sys., No. 12-1163: Whether a district court's exceptional-case finding under 35 U.S.C. § 285 of the Patent Act, based on its judgment that a suit is objectively baseless, is entitled to deference.
Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness, No. 12-1184: Does the Federal Circuit's promulgation of a rigid and exclusive two-part test for determining whether a case is "exceptional" under 35 U.S.C. § 285 improperly appropriate a district court's discretionary authority to award attorney fees to prevailing accused infringers in contravention of statutory intent and this Court's precedent, thereby raising the standard for accused infringers (but not patentees) to recoup fees and encouraging patent plaintiffs to bring spurious patent cases to cause competitive harm or coerce unwarranted settlements from defendants?
Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. 12-1173: Did the United States retain an implied reversionary interest in rights-of-way pursuant to the General Railroad Right-of-Way-Act of 1875 after the underlying lands were patented into private ownership?
Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, No. 12-1315: Whether the nonstatutory defense of laches is available without restriction to bar all remedies for civil copyright claims filed within the three-year statute of limitations prescribed by Congress, 17 U.S.C. § 507(b).
United States v. Castleman, No. 12-1371: Whether respondent's Tennessee conviction for misdemeanor domestic assault by intentionally or knowingly causing bodily injury to the mother of his child qualifies as a conviction for a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,” for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A) and 922(g)(9).
United States v. Quality Stores, No. 12-1408: Whether severance payments made to employees whose employment was involuntarily terminated are taxable under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, 26 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.
Navarette v. California, No. 12-9490: 1. Does the Fourth Amendment require an officer who receives an anonymous tip regarding a drunken or reckless driver to corroborate dangerous driving before stopping the vehicle?
2. Does an anonymous tip that a specific vehicle ran someone off the road provide reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle, where the detaining officer was only advised to be on the lookout for a reckless driver, and the officer could not corroborate dangerous driving despite following the suspect vehicle for several miles?