This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times, and has specific typeface formatting requirements. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site.
Proposal to reformat article as a Supreme Court case[edit]
This article includes discussion of a Supreme Court decision in the case, Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies, 572 U.S. _, 134 S.Ct. 2111 (2014). Typically an article about a Court of Appeals opinion that is then affirmed or reversed by the Supreme Court would be changed to the format of a typical SCOTUS article and renamed if necessary to reflect the SCOTUS case caption - see Matal v. Tam, which was previously In re Tam when decided by the Federal Circuit. However, given the large amount of discussion in this article about the Court of Appeals decisions, I am hesitant to make any dramatic changes without consensus. --LegalSkeptic (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
