National Law Journal Profiles Zac Hudson’s First Circuit Argument in Landmark Immigration Case

On April 9, 2014, as reported by the National Law Journal, Zac Hudson argued in Hinds v. Holder, before the First Circuit Court of Appeals, that deportation is a penalty that must be weighed in proportion to the crime committed.  Specifically, the statutory provision tasking immigration judges with deciding whether an alien is removable from the United States must be read to prohibit the entry of removal orders that would otherwise raise serious due process problems.  Hudson told the Court that removal orders that amounted to unduly harsh penalties and had tragic consequences would raise serious constitutional questions, and that in order to avoid those problems the statutory provision at issue should be construed so as to bar removal orders in certain exceptional cases.  Hudson explained that the plight of Bancroft pro bono client Rogelio Blackman Hinds proved the point.  Mr. Blackman is 59, has lawfully resided in the U.S. for nearly 40 years, is married to a U.S. citizen and has five U.S. citizen children (one is severely mentally and physically handicapped), served this country honorably as a U.S. Marine, and suffers from several health issues that are likely the result of his military service.

Hudson’s arguments received substantial amicus support, including from the Center for Constitutional Rights, the American Immigration Council, the Post-Deportation Human Rights Project at Boston College, the American Civil Liberties Union, and several law professors.

 

Erin Murphy Named Litigator of the Week by Litigation Daily

On April 3, 2014, the ALM Litigation Daily named Bancroft partner Erin Murphy ‘Litigator of the Week’ after she secured a major victory in the U.S. Supreme Court earlier in the week in McCutcheon v. FEC. Last fall, in her first argument at the high court, Murphy made the case that the federal limits on an individual’s aggregate campaign contributions violate the First Amendment. The court agreed, giving Murphy her first win in a high-profile case that has sparked widespread public debate.

Fourth Circuit Vacates $919 Million Jury Verdict in Kolon v. DuPont

On April 3, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled unanimously in favor of Bancroft client Kolon Industries in E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Industries, No. 12-1260. DuPont had accused Kolon of misappropriating trade secrets, and a jury returned a verdict for $919 million of money damages as well as a 20-year worldwide shutdown injunction. The Fourth Circuit vacated that verdict, holding that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to allow Kolon to introduce critical evidence showing that the purported trade secrets were actually public information. The court also exercised its “supervisory power” to reassign the case to a different judge on remand.

Bancroft attorneys Paul Clement, Jeffrey Harris, and Candice Chiu represented Kolon, along with co-counsel from the Paul Hastings firm.

Law360: Bancroft ‘Legal Lion’ of the Week

On April 3, 2014, Law360 named Bancroft one of the ‘Legal Lions’ of the week after securing victory in two major U.S. Supreme Court cases in one day. Describing Bancroft as an “Appellate titan,” the article details Bancroft’s wins in both Northwest v. Ginsberg and McCutcheon v. FEC.

Bancroft Wins Unanimous Supreme Court Judgment

On April 2, 2014, Bancroft attorneys Paul D. Clement and George W. Hicks secured a unanimous victory in the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the petitioners in Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, No. 12-462.  The Court held that the Airline Deregulation Act preempts state-law claims for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing when the claim seeks to enlarge the obligations voluntary adopted by parties to a contract.  It further held that such claims are preempted when the implied covenant cannot be waived or is read into contracts as a matter of state policy.

Supreme Court Rules for Bancroft in McCutcheon v. FEC

On April 2, 2014, Bancroft partner Erin E. Murphy secured victory in the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of Appellants Shaun McCutcheon and the Republican National Committee in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, No. 12-536. The Court determined that the aggregate contribution limits imposed by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (“BCRA”) violate the First Amendment. While the government argued that BRCA’s aggregate contribution limits prevent corruption or circumvention, the Court concluded “that the aggregate limits do little, if anything, to address that concern, while seriously restricting participation in the democratic process.”

Supreme Court Will Review Bancroft Fair Labor Standards Act Case

On March 3, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk, No. 13-433, which addresses whether time spent by employees in security screenings is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).  Although every previous court to consider this issue had held that time spent in security screenings is not compensable, the Ninth Circuit departed from that line of authority and held that employees could state an FLSA claim under this theory.  This case will likely have far-reaching implications for the business community, as a number of major employers—including Apple, Amazon.com, and CVS—are currently facing class-action FLSA claims seeking back pay for time spent in security screenings.  Bancroft attorneys Paul D. Clement and Jeffrey M. Harris represent Petitioner Integrity Staffing Solutions in this matter.  The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the fall of 2014.

Bancroft Partner Erin Murphy Featured as Panelist with Supreme Court Institute

On January 31, 2014, Georgetown Law reported on Bancroft partner Erin Murphy’s participation as a panelist on the Supreme Court Institute’s 2013 Mid-Term Preview.  Ms. Murphy joined “other standouts of the Supreme Court bar” in providing a look at upcoming cases on the Court’s docket.

Supreme Court Will Review Bancroft Petition in Copyright Infringement Case

On January 10, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted review in American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., et al. v. Aereo, Inc., No. 13-461, a high-stakes copyright infringement petition filed by Bancroft. The case involves a company, Aereo, that captures over-the-air television broadcasts and, without obtaining authorization from or compensating anyone, retransmits that programming over the Internet for a profit. Petitioners, who own the copyrights in much of the programming Aereo retransmits, allege that Aereo is infringing upon their exclusive rights under the Copyright Act. The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments this Term and issue a decision by late June.

The Legal Times Reports on Bancroft Partner Paul Clement

On January 6, 2014, the Legal Times spotlighted Bancroft partner Paul Clement’s role in a lawsuit filed by Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. Senator Johnson is challenging an Office of Personnel Management rule that allows lawmakers and their staff to receive subsidies for their health plans under the Affordable Care Act. Mr. Clement has been retained to consult on possible appellate issues.

Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed