that went to the Supreme Court. While the justices of the high court ruled there that a laches defense couldn't bar damages claims brought within the applicable three-year statute of limitations, there's been subsequent debate over whether plaintiffs can recover for infringements occurring prior to three years if they only belatedly discover injuries.
ruled that newly discovered injuries aren't time-barred but relief was limited to the three-year lookback window.framework, insisting that while the discovery rule remains good law,prevents Starz from recovering for any of MGM’s infringements that occurred more than three years before the operative date of the Complaint, regardless of when Starz discovered or reasonably should have discovered them.
Gee largely sides with Starz here, potentially setting up a circuit split that may one day be addressed by the Supreme Court.is that it did not change any law in the Ninth Circuit pertaining to the discovery rule and the three-year damages bar," she writes."It merely reaffirmed the rolling approach’s 'general' bar to recovery for infringements outside the three-year period, while letting stand the Ninth Circuit’s exception for the discovery rule...
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.