Third Circuit: In re. Energy Future Holdings

Bankruptcy court's order was an interlocutory one, as the court retained jurisdiction over the order and the case itself -- no clear error in court's decision that it had clearly erred earlier and the court's granting of a motion to amend filed under the inherent authority of the court.

Dissent: Nullifying an order without a clear error of fact or law undercuts commercial reliance.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/181109p.pdf

Second Circuit: Khalid v. Sessions

Despite the fact that petitioner was not living with a parent at the time due to a brief juvenile pretrial detention, the petitioner was still in the physical custody of the parent.  When examining a contested term within an area generally governed by state law, federal courts should look to state law indicia for the meaning of the term.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1b02a388-b3d2-411b-83ac-285cdabaaea6/1/doc/16-3480_complete_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1b02a388-b3d2-411b-83ac-285cdabaaea6/1/hilite/

First Circuit: Plixer International, Inc. v. Scrutinizer GMBH

Although a website's availability, in itself, does not constitute the purposeful availment of the resources of a jurisdiction, a steady and predictable flow of commerce to the jurisdiction can constitute sufficient purposeful availment to justify a reasonable assertion of jurisdiction.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/18-1195P-01A.pdf