Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief asking the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to review a three-judge panel’s decision granting a plaintiff standing for an injunction when it was not clear she had any actual or imminent injury. The case implicates the question of whether hypothetical or conjectural injury was sufficient to allow the suit to proceed, and it is important to manufacturers because such an expansive theory of standing encourages abusive, lawyer-driven litigation in which plaintiffs’ lawyers pursue meritless claims in the hope that the costs and risks of litigation will drive businesses to settle. The NAM’s brief argued that the panel decision lowered the bar for showing harm and encourages class-action litigation over product labeling by plaintiffs who will never buy the product in question. Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit denied the request to rehear the case.