Rare Full Court Rehearing Granted in Copyright Case Against Kat Von D’s Miles Davis Tattoo; PetaPixel, June 10, 2026

 THOMAS MADDREY, PetaPixel; Rare Full Court Rehearing Granted in Copyright Case Against Kat Von D’s Miles Davis Tattoo

"On June 9, Chief Judge for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mary H. Murguia issued an Order in the case of Jeffery B. Sedlik v. Katherine von Drachenberg, aka Kat Von D, et. al. granting an en banc rehearing by the full court...

In a nutshell, this rare move by the Court tells the litigants that even though a panel of three Ninth Circuit judges have rendered an opinion in the case, the question is unsettled enough that a hearing by the full 11-judge panel is warranted. 

This is not a common occurrence: in 2024, for example, the Court received 625 petitions for en banc review, 29 cases were then voted on by the Court to see if they should be heard, and only nine cases succeeded in that vote. In some years, this number increases, but rarely are more than 20 cases a year granted such a special evaluation. The Court reserved this designation for those cases that indicate a clear split with other Circuit Courts around the country, cases that are likely to be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, and if the issues presented affect many others similarly situated, among other considerations. This case checks all those boxes."

US appeals court judge charged in parking lot scuffle faces ethics inquiry; Reuters, June 8, 2026

Nate Raymond , Reuters; US appeals court judge charged in parking lot scuffle faces ethics inquiry

"A judge on the largest U.S. federal appeals court is facing a judicial misconduct inquiry after news reports over the weekend revealed that he had been criminally ​charged over a parking lot dispute in Idaho in April.

Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Mary Murguia of the 9th ‌U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in an order released on Monday said she had initiated a judicial misconduct complaint against U.S. Circuit Judge Ryan Nelson after he was hit with misdemeanor charges of battery and malicious injury to property on April 22."

9th Circuit Says No Copyright in Tracy Anderson, Megan Roup Workout Battle; The Fashion Law, February 24, 2026

 TFL, The Fashion Law; 9th Circuit Says No Copyright in Tracy Anderson, Megan Roup Workout Battle

"In the latest chapter of a closely-watched fitness industry feud, a federal appeals court handed Megan Roup a decisive victory in her copyright battle with rival trainer Tracy Anderson, affirming that Anderson’s dance-cardio routines are not protectable under federal copyright law. In a newly-issued memorandum, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in Roup’s favor, concluding that the so-called “TA Method” amounts to a functional fitness system rather than protectable choreography...

The Ninth Circuit’s ruling sends a clear message to fitness entrepreneurs: branding a workout as proprietary, scientific, or even choreographed will not convert a functional exercise system into a protectable work of authorship. For an industry built on personality-driven empires and carefully curated “methods,” the decision makes clear how limited a role copyright can play in safeguarding competitive advantage. With that in mind, parties like Anderson and Roup will have to rely on trademarks, trade secrets, and as this case illustrates, carefully drafted employment agreements, to protect their intellectual capital.

For now, Roup has secured a meaningful appellate win. And for Anderson, whose cult-followed method helped define boutique fitness in the 2000s, the fight continues – albeit on the contract (not copyright) front.

The case is Tracy Anderson Mind and Body, LLC, et al. v. Megan Roup, et al., 2:22-cv-04735 (C.D. Cal.) "

Federal court reverses decision on Idaho’s library materials law, returns case to lower court; Idaho Capital Sun, January 30, 2026

 SEAN DOLAN , Idaho Capital Sun; Federal court reverses decision on Idaho’s library materials law, returns case to lower court

"A federal appeals court on Thursday delivered welcome news for opponents of the Idaho Legislature’s 2024 law that established civil penalties for libraries and schools that allow children to access “harmful” material.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Thursday narrowly reversed a decision from the U.S. District Court of Idaho to deny a preliminary injunction that would have stopped the law from going into effect. The circuit court’s decision on Thursday sided with the plaintiffs, reversed the district court’s decision and returns the case back to the lower court to consider “the scope of a limited preliminary injunction” and to “conduct further proceedings consistent with our opinion...

HB 710’s “context clause” requires courts and other reviewers to consider if the allegedly offensive content in libraries and schools possesses “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.” The court concluded that the plaintiffs — a coalition of private schools and libraries and their patrons — showed a “likelihood of success” because the bill’s context clause is “overbroad on its face” and threatens to regulate a substantial amount of expressive activity."