Panel: Bea (author) Sixth Circuit Judge Thapur Collins Affirming the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the City of Santa Monica, the panel held that the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 does not require landlords to accommodate the disability of an individual who neither entered into a lease nor paid rent in exchange for the right to occupy the premises.
Panel: Wardlaw (author) Collins (concurring in part and concurring in the judgment) Court of International Trade Judge Eaton (dissenting) The panel reversed the district court’s denial of a motion for attorneys’ fees and remanded in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Justice.
En Banc Court: Thomas Tashima Graber W. Fletcher Berzon Rawlinson Bybee M. Smith Ikuta Watford Friedland On remand from the Supreme Court, the en banc court remanded the case to the three-judge panel for further consideration in light of Pereida v. Wilkinson, 141 S. Ct. 754 (2020).
Panel: Sixth Circuit Judge Boggs M. Smith (author) Murguia The panel affirmed in part and vacated in part the district court’s dismissal of an action brought by members of an employee pension plan, alleging breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and state-law professional negligence and negligent misrepresentation claims.
Panel: N.R. Smith Lee (author) District Judge Kennelly The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Starr Indemnity and Liability Company in a diversity insurance-coverage action.
Panel: Clifton M. Smith (author) District Judge Donato Concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc: M. Smith Dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: Collins, joined by Callahan, Bennett, and Bress The panel filed an order amending its opinion, denying a petition for panel rehearing, and denying on behalf of the court a petition for rehearing en banc; and an amended opinion affirming the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the State of Washington, upholding HB 1723, which amended Washington’s workers’ compensation scheme and established for workers at the Hanford site – a decommissioned federal nuclear production site – a presumption that certain conditions and cancers are occupational diseases that is rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence.
Panel: McKeown Hunsaker (author) Bumatay The panel granted a petition for review of a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission that concluded that the petitioner failed to prove a prima facie case of discrimination under Section 105(c) of the Mine Safety and Health Act, and remanded for further proceedings.
Panel: Wallace (author) M. Smith Court of International Trade Judge Restani The panel reversed the district court denial of defendants’ motion to compel arbitration of statutory employment discrimination and civil rights claims, and remanded with the direction that all claims be sent to arbitration and the case be dismissed without prejudice.
Panel: Bea Bade (author) District Judge Drain The panel affirmed a conviction for attempted extortion under the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a), for threatening to file against a well-known entertainer a suit asserting salacious and scandalous allegations if the entertainer didn’t settle for $1,000,000; vacated the sentence; and remanded for resentencing.
Panel: Watford (author) Friedland Miller The panel granted in part, denied in part, and dismissed in part, Israel Alvarado-Herrera’s petition for review of an immigration judge’s decision affirming an asylum officer’s negative reasonable fear determination in reinstatement proceedings, and remanded with instructions.
Panel: Berzon Collins (concurring in the judgment) Court of International Trade Judge Katzmann (author) The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s dismissal of an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 asserting that County social workers used judicial deception and violated plaintiffs’ constitutional rights in securing a juvenile court order resulting in the medical examinations of plaintiffs’ minor children while the children were in protective custody, without notice to the parents or their consent.
Panel: Sixth Circuit Judge Boggs (author) M. Smith Murguia The panel vacated a conviction for conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2332g, which prohibits illicit dealings in guided surface-to-air missiles; vacated the sentence; and remanded for further proceedings.
Panel: M. Smith Lee (author) District Judge Cardone The panel granted the government’s petition for rehearing, and amended its January 27, 2021, opinion that (1) affirmed the district court’s refusal to strike arrest allegations in a presentence report, (2) vacated sentences for simple possession of methamphetamine and felon-in-possession of a firearm, and (3) remanded for resentencing.
Panel: Wardlaw Gould Owens The panel vacated the district court’s order denying the defendant’s motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), and remanded, in a case in which the district court, citing U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, determined that the defendant’s release was unwarranted based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the danger she posed to the community.
Panel: Gould Lee (author) VanDyke Affirming the district court’s dismissal of a securities fraud action against an investment bank, the panel held that the complaint failed sufficiently to allege scienter.
Panel: W. Fletcher (author) Clifton (concurring) Miller (concurring in part and dissenting in part) The panel filed: 1) an order denying on behalf of the court a petition for rehearing en banc and amending the opinion filed on July 6, 2020; and 2) an amended opinion affirming the district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction against enforcement, in the four states on the United States-Mexico border, of a Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security joint interim final rule, entitled “Asylum Eligibility and Procedural Modifications,” which—with limited exceptions—categorically denies asylum to aliens arriving at the border with Mexico unless they have first applied for, and have been denied, asylum in Mexico or another country through which they have traveled.
Panel: Wardlaw Bea (author) District Judge Cain The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Intuitive Surgical, Inc., and held that a diversity product liability action was barred by the two-year statute of limitations in Cal. Code of Civ. Pro. § 335.1.