Expert Analysis

• 3 Misconceptions About Justices' FCC Fines Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's June 4 Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T decision rejecting AT&T’s and Verizon’s argument that the commission's forfeiture process violates the Seventh Amendment has yielded three common reactions that misunderstand the decision as a matter of law and how the FCC actually operates, says Samuel Feder at Jenner & Block.

• SEC Disgorged Fund Distribution Is Next Query After Sripetch

  

  Following the Supreme Court's Sripetch v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission decision, investor harm isn't required for the SEC to obtain a disgorgement award, but future cases must resolve whether the commission will be freed from a requirement to distribute disgorged funds to the victims of alleged misconduct, says Daniel Walfish at Katsky Korins.

• If Upheld, Wash. Millionaire Tax Could Upend State Law

  

  The Washington Supreme Court could open the door to broader income, rental and corporate taxes if it defies precedent and the historically established desires of voters by redefining the state constitution's concepts of “income” and “property” to uphold a new tax on wages over $1 million, says Richard Birmingham at Davis Wright.

• Trump Admin's Agency Records Purge Tests Judicial Notice

  

  While courts commonly take judicial notice of data in government websites and reports, the Trump administration's recent modification or wholesale deletion of these sources means that litigants must look elsewhere to support trial admission of this information, says Jon Gryskiewicz at Lewis Baach.

• Series

  Cow Horse Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Moving an unwilling 800-pound cow while riding a horse at high speed is exhilarating, a little unhinged and, at least for me, a surprisingly effective training ground for litigation — both demand focus, preparation over rigid planning and the willingness to act despite fear, says Ashley Zitrin at Glenn Agre.

• Fla. Driver Ruling Shows Renewed Focus On Privacy Standing

  

  A Florida federal court's recent dismissal of a class action alleging that private driving records had been improperly used in violation of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act suggests that companies defending against privacy class actions in Florida may reconsider Article III challenges at the dismissal stage, say attorneys at Sidley.

• Vax Ruling Offers Employer Tips For Handling Political Speech

  

  A California appeals court's recent decision in Rademacher v. ABC, rejecting a "General Hospital" actor's suit alleging he was terminated for opposing a vaccine policy, demonstrates the importance of the employer's process, including neutral policies, documentation, and evidence of who knew what and when, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• O Brother, Where Art DAO? Jurisdiction Issues Abound

  

  While there is a dearth of decisions examining a decentralized autonomous organization's citizenship for diversity jurisdiction purposes, Second Circuit case law has defined citizenship for other unincorporated entities, which may guide how courts evaluate an increasing number of cases involving DAOs, says Michael Mix at Morrison Cohen.

• Protecting AI-Driven Innovation In Life Sciences IP

  

  Recent developments, including the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's evolving inventorship standards, and the impact of artificial intelligence on the "person of ordinary skill in the art" standard demand that life sciences companies elevate AI patent strategy to a top priority, says Sandra Haberny at Quinn Emanuel.

• 2nd Circ. Ruling Notably Limits Sentencing Courts' Discretion

  

  The Second Circuit’s recent decision in U.S. v. Dralle clarifies the bounds of sentencing courts’ ability to consider uncharged or co-defendant conduct without tying it to statutory sentencing factors, and it may have broader implications for limiting loss attribution in white collar and other criminal cases, say attorneys at Lowenstein Sandler.

• High Court's Hikma Decision Reshapes 'Skinny Label' Suits

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Hikma v. Amarin marks a significant victory for generic drug manufacturers, but rather than putting an end to so-called skinny label inducement claims, it narrows and refocuses them, say attorneys at Sterne Kessler.

• Opinion

  At High Court, Oil Cos.' Suncor Preemption Claims Fall Short

  

  In Suncor Energy v. Boulder County, pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, oil and gas companies argue that municipalities' climate deception claims are equivalent to emissions standards for their industry — but the suit is ultimately incapable of imposing such standards, say Thomas McGarity at the University of Texas School of Law and James Goodwin at the Center for Progressive Reform.

• 3 Disgorgement Questions Linger After Justices' SEC Ruling

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Sripetch v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission avoided placing new limits on the SEC’s disgorgement powers, it passed over several questions, including whether the commission can seek disgorgement when returning the money to investors isn't possible, says David Slovick at Kopecky Schumacher.

• Checking For AI Errors Is Now A Two-Way Street

  

  A handful of recent federal and state cases demonstrate the importance of checking for errors generated by artificial intelligence not only in your own court submissions, but also your opponent's, as well as when catching opposing counsel's AI mistakes could result in an award for attorney fees, says Tamara Barago at Hollingsworth.

• Opinion

  Federal Circuit Should Implement Mini En Banc Process

  

  To fulfill its mission of uniformity in patent law while avoiding the challenges of en banc hearings, the Federal Circuit should institute mini en bancs — allowing regular three-judge panels to exercise en banc powers unless a majority of the court says otherwise, says Joshua Sohn at the U.S. Department of Justice.