United States Reports

Mach Mining, LLC v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 575 U.S. 480 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission can submit a sworn affidavit to show that it has completed the required conciliation process before suing for employment discrimination. An employer can challenge this affidavit with concrete evidence that the EEOC did not engage in conciliation in good faith, and a court can review that factual dispute.

Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 575 U.S. 496 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that an order from a bankruptcy court denying a debtor's confirmation of a proposed repayment cannot be immediately appealed, as it is not a final order. The decision, in favor of Blue Hills Bank, was unanimous.

Tibble v. Edison International, 575 U.S. 523 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "because a fiduciary normally has a continuing duty to monitor investments and remove imprudent ones, a plaintiff may allege that a fiduciary breached a duty of prudence by failing to properly monitor investments and remove imprudent ones. Such a claim is timely as long it is filed within six years of the alleged breach of continuing duty."

Coleman v. Tollefson, 575 U.S. 532 (2015), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with a prisoner's inability to file lawsuits in forma pauperis after filing 3 lawsuits which are dismissed because they are "frivolous, malicious, or [fail] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted."

Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne, 575 U.S. 542 (2015), is a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court held that a state income-tax scheme that taxes residents for in-state and out-of-state income violates the Dormant Commerce Clause when it does not provide residents with full credit for the income taxes they pay to other states.

City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan, 575 U.S. 600 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that police officers who entered the home of a mentally-ill woman and shot her were entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established law requiring them to accommodate mental illness.

Henderson v. United States, 575 U.S. 622 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held a court-ordered transfer of a felon's lawfully owned firearms from government custody to a third party is not barred by §922(g) if the court is satisfied that the recipient will not give the felon control over the firearms, so that he could either use them or direct their use.

Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 1920 (2015), was a 2015 decision by the United States Supreme Court pertaining to the standard for induced patent infringement. Writing for a 6-2 majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy held that (1) a claim of induced infringement requires a showing that the defendant knew that it is engaging in infringing conduct and (2) a defendant's belief that a patent is invalid is not a defense to a claim of induced infringement. Justice Antonin Scalia dissented from the second point, arguing that, in his view, a good faith belief in a patent's invalidity should constitute a defense to a charge of induced infringement.

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter, 575 U.S. 650 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court involving KBR and a former KRB contractor, Benjamin Carter. In a unanimous opinion written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, the Court held that Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act only applies to criminal offenses. The Court also held that qui tam lawsuits filed under the False Claims Act are no longer considered "pending" after they have been dismissed.

Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, 575 U.S. 665 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that bankruptcy courts may adjudicate Stern claims with the parties' knowing and voluntary consent.

Elonis v. United States, 575 U.S. 723 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning whether conviction of threatening another person over interstate lines (under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c)) requires proof of subjective intent to threaten or whether it is enough to show that a "reasonable person" would regard the statement as threatening. In controversy were the purported threats of violent rap lyrics written by Anthony Douglas Elonis and posted to Facebook under a pseudonym. The ACLU filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioner. It was the first time the Court has heard a case considering true threats and the limits of speech on social media.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, 575 U.S. 768 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding a Muslim American woman, Samantha Elauf, who was refused a job at Abercrombie & Fitch in 2008 because she wore a headscarf, which conflicted with the company's dress code. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled 8–1 in Elauf's favor on June 1, 2015.

Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, 575 U.S. 790 (2015), is a bankruptcy law case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 1, 2015. In Caulkett, the Court held that 11 U.S.C. § 506(d) does not permit a Chapter 7 debtor to void a junior mortgage on the debtor's property when the amount of the debt secured by the senior mortgage on that property exceeds the property's current market value.

Mellouli v. Lynch, 575 U.S. 798 (2015) is a Supreme Court of the United States ruling which reversed the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on the matter of whether Tunisian national Moones Mellouli should be deported after being convicted for driving under the influence.

Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 574 U.S. 259 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Truth in Lending Act does not require borrowers to file a lawsuit to rescind loans and that sending written notice is sufficient to effectuate rescission. Some commentators described Justice Antonin Scalia's unanimous majority opinion as "terse" and the "shortest opinion of the year". Other analysts have described Jesinoski as a "landmark case" in Truth in Lending Act jurisprudence.

Whitfield v. United States, 574 U.S. 265 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case that concerned whether the forced accompaniment statute under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(e) applies when a bank, credit union, or savings/loan association robber, or attempted robber, forces someone to accompany them for any distance. Defense attorney Joshua B. Carpenter argued on behalf of the Petitioner, and Assistant to the Solicitor General Brian H. Fletcher argued on behalf of the Department of Justice.

Jennings v. Stephens, 574 U.S. 271 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that in a federal habeas proceeding, a criminal defendant may argue a defense of the district court's judgment on alternative grounds without first taking a cross-appeal or obtaining a certificate of appealability unless doing so would enlarge the defendant's rights under the district court's judgment.

T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, 574 U.S. 293 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires a locality that denies an application to build cell-phone tower to state its reasons for denial with sufficient clarity in a written record issued essentially contemporaneously with the denial.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. 318 (2015), is a patent case of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the Copaxone patent. The Court held that, when reviewing a district court's resolution of subsidiary factual matters made in the course of its construction of a patent claim, the Federal Circuit must apply a "clear error," not a de novo, standard of review.

Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. 352 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously ruled that an Arkansas prison policy which prohibited a Muslim prisoner from growing a short beard in accordance with his religious beliefs violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).

Department of Homeland Security v. MacLean, 574 U.S. 383 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a whistleblower disclosure that is specifically prohibited by a rule or regulation is permitted because the disclosure is not "specifically prohibited by law" within the meaning of the statute protecting whistleblowers.

Gelboim v. Bank of America Corp., 574 U.S. 405 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that when multiple claims are consolidated into one proceeding, the dismissal of one of the claims is a final decision that may be appealed without waiting for final decisions on all claims.

Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank, 574 U.S. 418 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that whether two trademarks may be tacked for purposes of determining priority is a question for the jury.

M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett, 574 U.S. 427 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the interpretation of collective-bargaining agreements must follow ordinary contract principles when that interpretation does not conflict with federal labor policy.

Kansas v. Nebraska, 574 U.S. 445 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that, when a state knowingly fails to comply with an interstate compact, the Supreme Court may order that state to disgorge its profits from the violation or pay damages. If there is no danger of the violation happening again, no injunctive relief is necessary.

North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 574 U.S. 494 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case on the scope of immunity from US antitrust law. The Supreme Court held that a state occupational licensing board that was primarily composed of persons active in the market it regulates has immunity from antitrust law only when it is actively supervised by the state. The North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners had relied on the Parker immunity doctrine, established by the Supreme Court case Parker v. Brown, which held that actions by state governments acting in their sovereignty did not violate antitrust law.

Yates v. United States, 574 U.S. 528 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court construed 18 U.S.C. § 1519, a provision added to the federal criminal code by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, to criminalize the destruction or concealment of "any record, document, or tangible object" to obstruct a federal investigation. By a 5-to-4 vote, the Court stated that the term "tangible object" as used in this section means an object used to record or preserve information, and that this did not include fish.

Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, 576 U.S. 446 (2015), is a significant decision of the United States Supreme Court for several reasons. One is that the Court turned back a considerable amount of academic criticism of both the patent misuse doctrine as developed by the Supreme Court and the particular legal principle at issue in the case. Another is that the Court firmly rejected efforts to assimilate the patent misuse doctrine to antitrust law and explained in some detail the different policies at work in the two bodies of law. Finally, the majority and dissenting opinions informatively articulate two opposing views of the proper role of the doctrine of stare decisis in US law. The narrow issue in Kimble v.

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down eight per curiam opinions during its 2014 term, which began October 6, 2014 and concluded October 4, 2015.

Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, 574 U.S. 27 (2014), was a unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that time spent by workers waiting to undergo anti-employee theft security screenings is not "integral and indispensable" to their work, and thus not compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Court delivered their ruling on December 9, 2014.

Warger v. Shauers, 574 U.S. 40 (2014), was a unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that jurors may not testify about what occurred during jury deliberations, even to expose dishonesty during jury selection or voir dire. The Court delivered its ruling on December 9, 2014.

Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that a police officer's reasonable mistake of law can provide the individualized suspicion required by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to justify a traffic stop. The Court delivered its ruling on December 15, 2014.

Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81 (2015), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified procedures for removing a class action lawsuit from state court to federal court. The case involved a dispute about revenue from oil and gas leases in which the defendant filed a motion to remove the case from a state court in Kansas to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. However, the plaintiff argued that the defendant's motion was defective because the defendant's notice of removal did not include evidence demonstrating that the amount in controversy satisfied the jurisdictional threshold.

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 573 of the United States Reports:

Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, 573 U.S. 25 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, under Stern v. Marshall, when a bankruptcy court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a proceeding, the bankruptcy court may still hear the case and issue proposed findings to be reviewed de novo by a federal district court.

Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio, 573 U.S. 41 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that lawful residents in the United States who turned twenty-one while their visa applications were being processed could not retain their original application date after "aging out" of eligibility for child-visas. Those "aged out" were moved to the bottom of the list of applicants for adult visas. The Ninth Circuit Court had originally agreed that provisions in the Child Status Protection Act allowed applicants to retain their date.

POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 573 U.S. 102 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that a statutory private right of action under the Lanham Act is not precluded by regulatory provisions of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Clark v. Rameker, 573 U.S. 122 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that funds held in inherited Individual Retirement Accounts are not "retirement funds" within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(c) and therefore not exempt from the bankruptcy estate.

Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd., 573 U.S. 134 (2014), is a U.S. Supreme Court opinion regarding foreign sovereign immunity. After defaulting on its debt and losing a federal collection action, Argentina claimed that its foreign assets were immune from discovery. The Court found that no such immunity existed.

In the 2010 campaign, Susan B. Anthony List purchased billboard advertisements in the district of former U.S. Representative Steve Driehaus of Ohio that showed a photo of Driehaus and said, "Shame on Steve Driehaus! Driehaus voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion." The advertisement referred to Driehaus's vote in favor of the health care overhaul bill.

Abramski v. United States, 573 U.S. 169 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court found that making arrangements for a straw purchase of a gun is in violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968, and is different from re-selling or gifting a previously purchased gun. In the Abramski case, a former police officer from Virginia took advantage of a local discount to buy a gun for his uncle and later transferred it to Pennsylvania—the uncle's residence—using the appropriate federal procedure. During the purchase, Abramski falsely declared that he was purchasing the gun for himself.

Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), was a 2014 United States Supreme Court decision about patent eligibility of business method patents. The issue in the case was whether certain patent claims for a computer-implemented, electronic escrow service covered abstract ideas, which would make the claims ineligible for patent protection. The patents were held to be invalid, because the claims were drawn to an abstract idea, and implementing those claims on a computer was not enough to transform that abstract idea into patentable subject matter. Although the Alice opinion did not mention software as such, the case was widely considered as a decision on software patents or patents on software for business methods. Alice and the 2010 Supreme Court decision of Bilski v.

Lane v. Franks, 573 U.S. 228 (2014), is a U.S. Supreme Court case involving public employee's freedom of speech rights. Edward Lane sued Steve Franks for unfairly firing him, out of retaliation for sworn testimony Lane gave during a federal fraud case. The Eleventh Circuit originally ruled in favor of Franks, “denying [Lane] first amendment protection to subpoenaed testimony” (Page 6, section I). The case was argued before the Supreme Court on April 28, 2014. The case was decided on June 19, 2014. The Supreme Court sided with Lane that he was not responsible for something he said during a federal trial. However, the court could not award damages, because Frank's qualified immunity protected him from being sued in his personal capacity.

United States v. Clarke, 573 U.S. 248 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a taxpayer who wants to question Internal Revenue Service agents about their motives for issuing a summons may do so if they can point to "specific facts or circumstances plausibly raising an inference of bad faith."

Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 573 U.S. 258 (2014), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding class action certification for a securities fraud claim. Under the fraud-on-the-market theory, the Court had to inquire as to if markets are economically efficient. The Court presumed they are.

Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency, 573 U.S. 302 (2014), was a US Supreme Court case regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's regulation of air pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Loughrin v. United States, 573 U.S. 351 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a conviction of the crime of knowingly executing a scheme to obtain property owned by, or under the custody of, a bank "by means of false or fraudulent pretenses," does not require the government to prove that a defendant intended to defraud a financial institution.

Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, 573 U.S. 409 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court found Employee stockownership (ESOP) fiduciaries have the same prudential duties as non-ESOP fiduciaries, as set by ERISA, except that they are not required to diversify their investments beyond shares of the employer's stock.

American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., 573 U.S. 431 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case. The Court ruled that the service provided by Aereo, which allowed subscribers to view live and time-shifted streams of over-the-air television on Internet-connected devices, violated copyright laws.