Brock Huebner

5 days ago | jdsupra.com | Ian Blodger |Brock Huebner |Jessica Leano

On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions:Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 24-7: This case addresses fuel producers’ Article III standing to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) approval of California regulations requiring automakers to manufacture more electric vehicles and fewer gasoline-powered vehicles.

1 week ago | jdsupra.com | Ian Blodger |Brock Huebner |Jessica Leano

The Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions today:United States v.

1 week ago | jdsupra.com | Ian Blodger |Brock Huebner |Jessica Leano

The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in two cases today:First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin, No. 24-781: This case concerns the appropriate forum for raising constitutional defenses against a subpoena issued by a state attorney general. In this case, a faith-based non-profit providing counseling for unplanned pregnancies claimed a subpoena issued under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act would chill its First Amendment rights.

2 weeks ago | jdsupra.com | Ian Blodger |Brock Huebner |Jessica Leano

The Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions today:Parrish v. United States, No. 24-275: This case addresses the procedural requirements for filing a notice of appeal after the original deadline to appeal has lapsed when the appellant has filed a motion to reopen the time to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c). Petitioner Donte Parrish brought a lawsuit while he was an inmate in a federal prison.

2 weeks ago | jdsupra.com | Ian Blodger |Brock Huebner |Jessica Leano

On June 6, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in four cases:Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton, No. 24-808: This case concerns the applicability of the “reasonable time” requirement for parties to file a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) seeking relief from a judgment or order. The question presented is: Whether Rule 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a void default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction. Rutherford v.