No. 20-131

Essity Hygiene and Health AB v. Cascades Canada ULC, et al.

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2020-08-07
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: appointments-clause constitutional-interpretation discretion federal-circuit forfeiture judicial-discretion pending-cases precedential-decision scalia
Latest Conference: 2020-10-09
Question Presented (from Petition)

Following a precedential decision sustaining an Appointments Clause challenge, does a court have discretion to apply the decision in pending cases where it has not already been raised, and if so, under what circumstances should it exercise that discretion?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether courts have discretion to apply a precedential Appointments Clause decision in pending cases where the issue was not raised in the opening appellate brief, and if so, under what circumstances

Docket Entries

2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-07-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 8, 2020)

Attorneys

Essity Hygiene and Health AB, et al.
Martin J. BlackDechert LLP, Petitioner