Recently in Court News Category

The D.C. Circuit Court takes the lead, and the rest shall follow. Back in January of this year, the court found President Obama's recess appointments unconstitutional. Now the Third Circuit is following in its footsteps with a similar decision.

The circumstances of Obama's recess appointments involve a fight over technicalities much like an old Friends episode where Ross would continue to declare to Rachel, "We were on a break!"

When you've argued at least 20 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and worked in the Solicitor General's Office for two different administrations (Bush II and Obama), and Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Nine, (a personal favorite) writes a New Yorker feature on you, titled, "The Supreme Court Nominee-in-Waiting," some idiot blogger shouldn't be wondering who you actually are.

Still ... who is Sri Srinivansan? Who is the man who worked for Republicans, worked for Democrats, and now has been unanimously approved to the right-leaning D.C. Circuit by a left-leaning president -- after years of Republicans blocking President Obama's nominees?

When the FDA approves a pharmaceutical manufacturer’s New Drug Application application, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) entitles the manufacturer to a period of marketing exclusivity during which the FDA cannot approve bioequivalent generics. Once the exclusivity period has expired, the FDA can approve generic drugs bioequivalent to the pioneer drug through an abbreviated new drug application.

But there’s a way for drug manufacturers to extend their marketing exclusivity period: The FDCA provides for additional periods of exclusivity for pioneer drug through an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA).

Remember when the D.C. Circuit overturned Osama bin Laden’s driver’s conviction for material support of terrorism last October? It seems that wasn’t the appellate court’s final word on the issue.

Tuesday, the D.C. Circuit agreed to reconsider its take on Military Commissions Act convictions en banc in Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. USA, a case involving Osama bin Laden’s personal and media director.

Politico proclaims that there’s a “showdown on the D.C. Circuit.” The Washington Post editorial board calls it the “Republicans’ D.C. Circuit barricade.”

After four years of unfilled vacancies on the nation’s so-called second-highest court, the media is finally giving this confirmation crisis the Pay-Per-View boxing-worthy buzz it deserves.

In case you don’t follow the federal judicial vacancies like we do, there are four spots to be filled on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. One of those spots — Chief Justice John Roberts former seat — has been empty since 2005. That’s what we obsessive-court-watchers refer to as “not good.”

Caitlin Halligan won’t be leaving her job as general counsel for the Manhattan district attorney’s office quite yet.

After two-and-a-half years and two filibusters in nomination limbo, Halligan asked President Obama to withdraw her nomination for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, The Washington Post reports.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the Obama administration can’t brag about using drones to kill terrorists overseas, but clam up about drone program documents at the drop of a FOIA request, NPR reports.

The appellate court phrased its opinion in less direct and more eloquent terms, so let’s turn to its reasoning.

The central legal issue in the case is whether government officials — including President Obama and former CIA Director and then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta — officially and publicly acknowledged the existence of the CIA’s use of drone airstrikes.

In 2011, the FDA approved three abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) submitted by Identi Pharmaceuticals for generic versions of Hill Dermaceuticals’ products. Hill sued the FDA, arguing that the FDA’s approval of Identi’s products was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The district court granted summary judgment to the FDA. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision, finding that the “basic tenets of administrative law” have a greater impact in an appeal than Hill’s arguments hyperbolic references to the “immutable laws of science.”

California almond producers claim that the Secretary of Agriculture — attempting to prevent the spread of salmonella — exceeded his authority in requiring California almonds sold domestically to be treated with heat or chemicals.

They should have raised that objection before the rule became final.

Last week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the almond farmers waived those claims by failing to raise them during the rulemaking process.

Do you really want the State of New Jersey handling the decommissioning of a nuclear facility? If you’ve ever watched an episode of Jersey Shore, or Real Housewives of New Jersey, or Jerseylicious, you would have to have doubts, right?.

And you wouldn’t be alone.

This week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s proposed transfer of authority over nuclear waste disposal at the Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation to New Jersey was arbitrary and capricious. This is the second time that the appellate court has put the kabosh on the NRC’s plans for the site, The Associated Press reports.