Cases

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE I; JOHN DOE II; No. 10-56739 JOHN DOE III, individually and on behalf of proposed D.C. No. class members; GLOBAL 2:05-CV-05133-SVW- EXCHANGE, JTL Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ORDER AND AMENDED ORDER NESTLE USA, INC.; ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND C

ORDER The order filed December 19, 2013, and appearing at 738 F.3d 1048, is withdrawn, Carver v. Lehman, 558 F.3d 869, 878-79 (9th Cir.2009), and is replaced by the opinion filed concurrently with this order. Our prior order may not be cited as precedent to any court. Moreover, with the original order withdrawn, we deem the petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc moot. The parties may file a petition for rehearing and

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE I; JOHN DOE II; JOHN DOE No. 10-56739 III, individually and on behalf of proposed class members; GLOBAL D.C. No. EXCHANGE, 2:05-CV-05133- Plaintiffs-Appellants, SVW-JTL v. ORDER AND NESTLE USA, INC.; ARCHER OPINION DANIELS MIDLAND

1 2025 CO 21 In Re County Commissioners of Boulder County and City of Boulder, Plaintiffs: v. Suncor Energy USA, Inc.; Suncor Energy Sales, Inc.; Suncor Energy Inc.; and Exxon Mobil Corporation, Defendants: No. 24SA206Supreme Court of Colorado, En BancMay 12, 2025 Original Proceeding Pursua

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROYCE C. LAMBERTH, United States District Judge Today, the Court disposes of a number of pending motions in two separate but closely related cases, John Doe I, et al. v. *83 Exxon Mobil Corp., et al., Civil No. 0

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0134p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DANA NESSEL, Attorney General of the State of │ Michigan, on behalf of the p

M. Hannah Lauck, United States District Judge This matter comes before the Court on the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the "Motion to Dismiss") filed by Respondents Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC ("Powhatan"), Houlian "Alan" Chen ("Chen"), HEEP Fund, Inc. ("HEEP Fund"), and CU Fund, Inc. ("CU Fund") (collectively, "Respondents"). (ECF No. 95.) Respondents contend that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC" or the "Commission") brough

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DOE I; DOE II; IVY HE; DOE III; No. 15-16909 DOE IV; DOE V; DOE VI; CHARLES LEE; ROE VII; ROE VIII; D.C. No. 5:11-cv- LIU GUIFU; DOE IX; WEIYU 02449-EJD WANG, and those individuals similarly situated, ORDER Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.; JOHN CHAMBERS; FREDY CHEUNG, AKA Zhang Sihua; DOES, 1-100,

M. Hannah Lauck, United States District Judge This matter comes before the Court on cross-briefs filed by Petitioner Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC" or the "Commission"), (ECF No. 39), and Respondents Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC ("Powhatan"), Houlian "Alan" Chen ("Chen"), HEEP Fund, Inc. ("HEEP Fund"), and CU Fund, Inc. ("CU Fund") (collectively, the "Respondents"), (ECF No. 38). Both briefs discuss, as ordered by the Cou

Appellate Case: 25-3046 Document: 124-1 Date Filed: 07/06/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS July 6, 2026

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DOE I; DOE II; IVY HE; DOE III; No. 15-16909 DOE IV; DOE V; DOE VI; CHARLES LEE; ROE VII; ROE VIII; D.C. No. 5:11-cv- LIU GUIFU; DOE IX; WEIYU 02449-EJD WANG, and those individuals similarly situated, OPINION Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.; JOHN CHAMBERS; FREDY CHEUNG, AKA Zhang Sihua; DOES, 1-

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued February 28, 2024 Decided August 16, 2024 No. 23-7031 NEXTERA ENERGY GLOBAL HOLDINGS B.V. AND NEXTERA ENERGY SPAIN HOLDINGS B.V., APPELLEES v. KINGDOM OF SPAIN, APPELLANT Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbi

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE GULF LNG ENERGY, LLC and § GULF LNG PIPELINE, LLC, § No. 22, 2020 § Plaintiffs Below, § Appellants, § Court Below: Court of Chancery § of the State of Delaware v. § § ENI USA GAS MARKETING LLC, § C.A. No. 2019-0460 § Defen

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. As in numerous other cases pending in this and other jurisdictions across the country, this ease involves a copyright owner’s effort to protect a copyrighted work from unknown individuals, who are allegedly illegally copying and distributing the work on the Internet. Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC

BEA, Circuit Judge, with whom , O’SCANNLAIN, GOULD, TALLMAN, BYBEE, CALLAHAN, M. SMITH, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, join, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: Unfortunately, the panel majority here has substituted sympathy for legal analysis. I quite agree plaintiffs are deserving *947of sympathy. They are alleged former child slaves of

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued May 8, 2023 Decided December 19, 2023 No. 22-7163 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, APPELLEE v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:20-cv-0193

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2009 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

OPINION OF THE COURT McKEE, Circuit Judge. Gucci America, Inc. appeals the district court’s decision to deny Gucci’s request for an order compelling defendant Daffy’s, Inc. to recall counterfeit “Jackie-O” handbags. Gucci also appeals the district court’s denial of Gucci’s request for an accounting of profits and other injunctive relief. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm. I.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER CHRISTINE O.C. MILLER, Judge. Plaintiffs claim for damages from an alleged taking of his property and for breach of contract is before the court after argument and supplemental briefing on defendant’s motion to dismiss under RCFC 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, under RCFC 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim for relief. A nove