Cases compared
Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp. vs. Oklahoma v. United States vs. Lina Noland, et al., Petitioners v. Federal Trade Commission
Administrative Law cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
No. 25-1230No. 25-1325No. 25-1403
Side by side
| Fact | Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp. | Oklahoma v. United States | Lina Noland, et al., Petitioners v. Federal Trade Commission |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | 25-1230 | 25-1325 | 25-1403 |
| Status | Before Arguments | Before Arguments | Before Arguments |
| Date | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) |
| Question presented | 1. Whether the PTO retains statutory authority to deny institution based on the “settled expectations” factor, where discretion is committed to the PTO and no statutory provision prohibits consideration of settled expectations. 2. Whether the “drastic and extraordinary” remedy of mandamus is appropriate where Google identifies no statutory text that has been violated and the Federal Circuit has held that an alternative vehicle—a notice-and-comment rulemaking challenge—remains available. | Whether the Act’s delegation of law-enforcement and rulemaking power to the private Authority violates the Constitution’s private non-delegation doctrine? | 1. Whether, after AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Federal Trade Commission may preserve an ex parte Section 13(b) asset freeze and receivership and obtain a revenue-based, multi-million-dollar monetary judgment through civil contempt where the judgment functions as restitution or disgorgement, is not tied to identified sustained losses, and the only rule-violation damages awarded under Section 19 were $6,829. 2. Whether the Seventh Amendment and due process permit a federal agency to obtain a $7,306,873.14 revenue-based monetary sanction, labeled civil compensatory contempt, through a bench proceeding where the sanction operates as a legal money judgment rather than compensation for proven individualized losses and where the ex parte freeze impaired Petitioners' ability to fund and preserve a jury defense. |
| Summary | Google asks the Court to review the Patent and Trademark Office’s policy of refusing to start certain inter partes reviews because a patent owner has “settled expectations” after the patent has been in force for six years. Google also challenges the Federal Circuit’s refusal to issue mandamus requiring the PTO to reconsider that policy. | Oklahoma and other petitioners ask the Supreme Court to review the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, which gives the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority significant rulemaking and enforcement duties over the horse-racing industry. They argue that Congress unconstitutionally gave governmental power to a private entity; the Sixth Circuit rejected that challenge. | This case concerns an FTC enforcement action in which the agency obtained an ex parte asset freeze, a receivership, and a $7.3 million civil-contempt monetary judgment against Lina Noland and others. The petitioners argue that, after recent Supreme Court decisions limiting FTC monetary remedies, the judgment improperly functions as restitution or disgorgement and was imposed without a jury despite not being tied to proven individual losses. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Administrative Law
- Why compared
- Reviewed Administrative Law tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.