eBriefs June 11, 2019

TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 2019


U.S. Supreme Court

Civil Procedure

Where federal law addresses the relevant issue, state law is not adopted as surrogate federal law on the Outer Continental Shelf.

Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-389


Criminal Law and Procedure

Generic remaining-in burglary occurs under 18 U.S.C. §924(e) when the defendant forms the intent to commit a crime at any time while unlawfully remaining in a building or structure; the intent to commit a crime must be contemporaneous with unlawful entry or remaining, but the defendant’s intent is contemporaneous with the unlawful remaining so long as the defendant forms the intent at any time while unlawfully remaining. The Michigan home-invasion statute substantially corresponds to or is narrower than generic burglary.

Quarles v. United States; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-778


Intellectual Property

The government is not a “person” capable of instituting administrative review proceedings under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.

Return Mail, Inc. v. Postal Service; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-1594


Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Employment Law

Employees aggrieved by a union’s breach of its duty of fair representation during collective bargaining cannot sue their employer for “colluding” in the union’s breach.

Beckington v. American Airlines, Inc.; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-15648



Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 16-56057


California Court of Appeal

Criminal Law and Procedure

While a trial judge generally cannot reconsider and overrule an order of another trial judge, the Legislature provided multiple procedural vehicles to litigate and relitigate search and seizure issues before trial; a defendant can raise a suppression argument in a Penal Code §995 motion before a judge even though a different judge rejected those same arguments in an earlier motion filed pursuant to §1538.5(i). When a law enforcement officer pulls in behind a parked car and trains a spotlight on the car, a reasonable motorist would not believe himself free to leave; a police officer did not have a reasonable suspicion to detain a motorist in a parked car with his foglamps illuminated.

People v. Kidd; Fourth District, Div. Two; filed May 16, 2019, publication ordered June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2664


Employment Law

While a policy or practice of failing to pay premium wages after meal period violations is an unfair business practice within the meaning of the Unfair Competition Law, a class of plaintiffs must still show the no-premium-wages policy harmed the class members in a manner entitling them restitution. A plaintiff cannot have her untimely-filed Private Attorneys General Act claim relate-back to a prior complaint that did not raise a PAGA claim, and that did not allege a pre-filing notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency.

Esparza v. Safeway, Inc.; Second District, Div. Four; filed June 10, 2019


Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2669