DC Circuit: James Roberts v. NTSB

The clock for a petition for fees under the statute starts with the final judgment, not with the subsequent final agency resolution.

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/4D6C022174310506852582C600521ED6/$file/14-1022-1739804.pdf

Eleventh Circuit: William B. Newton, et al v. Duke Energy Florida, LLC, et al

Domestic customers of a utility in a regulated monopoly are outside the zone of interests of the Dormant Commerce Clause where the local utility is not subject to competition with out-of-state utilities.

State laws promoting the construction of nuclear power plants are not preempted by federal legislation.

While request for leave to amend in response brief was permissible, the description of the amendment wasn't sufficient to allow the court to consider the motion.

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201710080.pdf

Tenth Circuit: Moya v. Garcia

Panel rehearing order and amended opinion.

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-2037.pdf

Tenth Circuit: Canyon Fuel Company v. Secretary of Labor

Although deference is due to the agency's resolution of an ambiguous provision in the statute by clarifying that conditions outside of the mine escape must be considered in evaluating its compliance with the regulation, the agency's decision was not supported by substantial evidence, since no formal evaluation of the two escape routes in light of these criteria was conducted.

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-9541.pdf

Ninth Circuit: US v. Hernandez

Distribution of the image to the 17 year old minor depicted in it suffices to establish distribution for the purpose of the sentencing enhancement.

Sentencing statement by the judge that emphasized the defendant's decision to go to trial before imposing a 284 month sentence improperly infringed on deft's Sixth Amendment right to trial.

Dissent: This would be a procedural error, which deft doesn't raise, and court conflates.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/10/13-10428.pdf

Ninth Circuit: Goudelock v. Sixty-01 Ass'n

Chapter 13 of the Act does not provide an exception to discharge for post-petition associational assessments.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/10/16-35384.pdf

Eighth Circuit: Michael Holmes v. Bobby Lee Garrett

Evidence of plaintiff's prior convictions properly excluded in S1983 claim, as a "mere presence" defense does not open the door for an examination of the plaintiff's truthfulness in a S1983 suit; the question being tried is the conduct of the officer.  Additionally, not probative of plaintiff's truthfulness.

Admission of prosecutor's testimony about deft's guilty pleas, if error, not prejudicial.  Physician expert had appropriate foundation. Sufficient evidence for conspiracy, given pre-existing working relationship; sufficient evidence for state tort claims.

Conspiracy instruction did not lower the threshold; court did not err in adding a definition of "instigate" to the standard instruction; damages can be prospective under state law.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/07/171309P.pdf

Eighth Circuit: Chantel Courtney v. Commissioner, Social Security

An ALJ has no obligation to inquire into the basis of vocational expert's going beyond the terms of the job guide so long as the extra elements do not conflict with the terms of the job guide.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/07/171777P.pdf

Seventh Circuit: Roy Mitchell, Jr. v. Kevin Kallas

There is a genuine issue for trial where a sufficiently controlling prison physician completely denies treatment for gender issues due to the short time remaining in sentence.  Where parole conditions do not preclude such treatment, allegations that parole officers blocked treatment for gender issues presents an issue for trial.  Where disparate theories of harm arising from both incarceration and post-release restrictions have a common factual basis, a single action is permissible under statute.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:16-3350:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184144:S:0

Seventh Circuit: USA v. Ronald Norweathers

As the prosecution might legitimately have expected that deft would say that someone else sent the files, court's admission of uncharged emails was not unduly prejudicial; the emails were also not used to establish propensity, as the primary fact asserted was the identity of the emailer.  If error, harmless, given other evidence.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:17-1311:J:Bauer:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184049:S:0

Seventh Circuit: Jon Giles v. Gabrielle Tobeck

The actions of a prison guard who mistakenly unlocked a section of cells and negligently relied on an inmate to voluntarily return to a cell unescorted did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference vis-a-vis the subsequent fisticuffs.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:17-1707:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184277:S:0

Seventh Circuit: Theresa Mason-Funk v. City of Neenah

Qualified immunity for police officers who killed an innocent person during a hostage situation, as the only circuit precedent holding that officials have a duty of care in such a situation was subsequently vacated as moot.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:17-3380:J:Bauer:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184309:S:0

Sixth Circuit: Teresa Barry v. James O'Grady

Court has no jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal as to denial of qualified immunity when the petition argues disputed facts; any theory of appeal that holds that there is no issue for trial must construe any disputed facts in favor of the opposing party.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0136p-06.pdf

Sixth Circuit: Larry Slusser v. United States

Knowing and voluntary appeals waiver in plea deal forfeited the right to challenge a sentence that, given subsequent developments in the law, has become in excess of the statutory maximum sentence for the crime.  Circuit precedent to the contrary was dicta.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0136p-06.pdf

Sixth Circuit: In Re: Estate of Jerry West v. U.S. Dep't of Veterans Affairs

As the state court lost jurisdiction over the matter when the district court took it up, common-law probate remand to the state court had no basis, as there was no dual jurisdiction to resolve.  Also, state court did not have jurisdiction over claim, due to statutory administrative review procedures.

Dissent: Statute requires District Court to remand; District Court has no power to examine state forum's basis for jurisdiction.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0134p-06.pdf

Fifth Circuit: Arthur Mitchell v. City of Naples, et al

To present a genuine issue of material fact for trial as to the qualified immunity of the defendants in a wage discrimination claim, the plaintiff must present valid comparators with substantially similar positions.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-40737-CV0.pdf

Second Circuit: Massey v. United States

Habeas petition is untimely when petitioner was sentenced under an earlier-abrogated provision of the law that established certain crimes as predicate convictions based on the use of force, but petitions for relief under a subsequent holding of the Supreme Court as to the residual clause of the same law, since only the latter announced a substantive change in the law.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/doc/17-1676_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/hilite/

Federal Circuit: Texas Optoelectronic v. Renesas Electronics

Although two of the three theories of trade secret misappropriation advanced at trial were legally erroneous, the evidence of the one remaining theory preponderated, and so the verdict can stand, but remanded to determine amount of equitable disgorgement under that theory.  As disgorgement was not available as a remedy for IP infringement in 1791, there is no right to demand a jury trial on the question.

Many other small things, and time is short.

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-2121.Opinion.7-9-2018.pdf

DC Circuit: Morley v. CIA

Court did not abuse its discretion in denying award of fees in FOIA action, as court might reasonably have found the agency's actions to be reasonable.

Dissent: Violation of a statute requiring agency to disclose otherwise available documents instead of referring the requester to the alternate source was, by it terms, unreasonable.

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/FAFBF71409B33B0E852582C50070FE19/$file/17-5114-1739739.pdf

Tenth Circuit: Lamb v. Norwood

Absent case-specific medical findings, a prisoner's assertion of medical necessity of gender transition does not present a genuine issue of deliberate indifference for trial. 

Petitioner did no have standing to challenge the preliminary investigative report or to supplement it, as its conclusions could be rebutted in the motions for and against summary judgment.

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-3171.pdf