“The issue in this case boils down to a simple question: Where’s the beef?” So begins an opinion that Circuit Judge Richard C. Tallman issued today on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

A related YouTube video — not from the Ninth Circuit’s official YouTube channel — can be accessed here.

“Oklahoma House overrides vetoes on two anti-abortion bills”: The Oklahoman has this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Okla. House overrides abortion restrictions vetoes.”

“Justices to Consider Law Limiting the Sale of Violent Video Games”: Adam Liptak will have this article Tuesday in The New York Times.

In Tuesday’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes will have an article headlined “Supreme Court to enter fight over violent video games.”

And in Tuesday’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, Ben Fritz and David G. Savage will have an article headlined “Supreme Court to hear case on violent video games; The high court agrees to decide whether California and six other states can forbid the sale to minors of video games that show images of humans being maimed, killed or sexually assaulted.”

“Justice by the Hour: The Supreme Court tangles with mandatory arbitration clauses.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.

You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson, No. 09-497.

Three-judge Federal Circuit panel vacates notable attorneys’ fee award that Senior U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch had entered against lawyers from McDermott, Will & Emery in the Medtronic v. BrainLAB case: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit at this link.

Judge Matsch’s imposition of sanctions, which the Federal Circuit has now set aside, received much press coverage. The Denver Post reported that “Judge makes lawyers pay for frivolity; With the verdict overturned, two attorneys must pay the others’ fees.” The Recorder, via law.com, reported that “Federal Judge Blasts Top IP Litigators; Ruling comes in patent fight between medical device companies Medtronic and BrainLAB.” And WSJ.com’s “Law Blog” had a post titled “Judge Matsch Drops the Gavel on McDermott Lawyers,” which linked to the trial court’s sanctions ruling.

In an earlier ruling on the merits of the case, the Federal Circuit upheld Judge Matsch’s decision setting aside the jury’s verdict in favor of Medtronic and granting judgment as a matter of law in favor of BrainLAB.

Divided Supreme Court of California expands availability of judicial review of legally erroneous arbitration decisions in employment discrimination cases: You can access today’s 4-3 ruling of California’s highest court at this link.

“Supreme Court to hear case on violent video games; The high court agrees to decide whether California and six other states can forbid the sale to minors of video games that show images of humans being maimed, killed or sexually assaulted”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update headlined “Violent video-game ban for kids to get hearing.”

Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court to review ban on sale of violent video games to minors.”

Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor reports that “Supreme Court to take up sale of violent video games to minors; The Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of a ban on the sale of violent video games to minors by the state of California.”

Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “High court accepts case over violent video games.”

James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Top court to rule on California video game law.”

Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Violent Video Game Law Gets Top U.S. Court Hearing.”

And at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog, David Kravets has a post titled “Supreme Court Takes on Video Game Sales.”

“Once-ousted Bush prosecutor promotes Guantanamo war court”: Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has a news update that begins, “For hearings on whether U.S. forces tortured confessions out of a Canadian teenager accused of killing an American soldier in Afghanistan, the Pentagon Monday unveiled a new face to advocate military commissions: Fired former Bush-era prosecutor David Iglesias, a key figure in the so-called Attorney-Gate scandal.”

“High Court Faces Blockbuster Cases as Stevens’ Retirement Nears”: Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal has this report.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania asked to decide whether playing Texas hold ’em poker for anything of value constitutes illegal gambling under state law: I have filed this Petition for Allowance of Appeal today in Pennsylvania’s highest court.

The trial court’s ruling in my clients’ favor can be accessed here. Last month’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in favor of the prosecution can be accessed here.

“Court: Wal-Mart gender pay lawsuit can go to trial.” Bill Mears of CNN.com has this report.

Financial Times reports that “Massive Walmart class action suit to proceed.”

And Dow Jones Newswires report that “Wal-Mart Hit With Set-Back In Alleged Sex Discrimination.”

“WH: No Supreme Court pick this week.” The Associated Press has this report.

“Court: Wal-Mart to face massive class action suit.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A divided federal appeals court in San Francisco says Wal-Mart Stores Inc. must face a massive class-action lawsuit that claims the world’s largest private employer discriminates against women workers.”

Reuters reports that “U.S. court lets Wal-Mart gender bias suit proceed; Appeals court backs class-action for injunctive relief.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Wal-Mart Workers Can Sue as Group in Gender Bias Case.”

You can access today’s 6-5 ruling of an 11-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.

Access online today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court has posted today’s Order List at this link.

The Court granted review in two cases and called for the views of the Solicitor General in one case.

At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court to rule on violent video games.”

And in early news coverage, The Associated Press has reports headlined “Court to decide if state can regulate video games“; “Court to hear appeal in guard’s sexual assault“; and “Court stays out of Asian carp dispute.”

“States seek new ways to restrict abortions; Nebraska law leads way as ‘free-for-all’ erupts”: This front page article appears today in USA Today.