Expert Analysis

• Monsanto Ruling Bolsters Generic Drug Labeling Preemption

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell concerns herbicide labeling regulated by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, but also carries weighty implications for preemption of state law labeling claims against drug manufacturers, say Terry Henry and Ann Querns at Blank Rome and Melanie Leney at Aurobindo Pharma.

• Justices' Tax Sale Ruling Tees Up Auction Fairness Battles

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan, that taxpayers are not entitled to fair market value of real property seized to satisfy a tax debt shifts attention to the fairness of state and local auction procedures, and whether taxpayers claiming surplus proceeds face unwarranted hurdles, say attorneys at Miller Canfield.

• Why The 2nd Circ. Upheld Beneficial Ownership Blockers

  

  The Second Circuit recently held that a properly drafted contractual blocker — which caps an investor's beneficial ownership below 10% and automatically voids any transaction that would breach the cap — shields the investor from Section 16(b) liability, demonstrating that blockers have teeth, say attorneys at Sheppard.

• Patent Eligibility Reforms Keep Chasing The Wrong Fixes

  

  Repeated efforts to create a consistent, predictable patent eligibility standard under Section 101 have centered on replacing judge-made exceptions with new statutory language, but the better fix is to align examination standards with how courts actually apply eligibility doctrine, says former Patent Trial and Appeal Board judge Amee Shah.

• Opinion

  Qualified Immunity Bill's Reach Goes Beyond Federal Officers

  

  The federal Qualified Immunity Abolition Act, introduced earlier this year and described by the bill sponsors as a federal-officer measure, would in actuality reach the entire universe of Section 1983 defendants, a distinction that matters as much to defense counsel as to plaintiffs, says attorney V. James DeSimone.

• Where The Justices Aligned In Appellate Authority Ruling

  

  The real story of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System Corp., finding that a doctrine designed to curtail duplicative litigation prevents federal district courts from reviewing state court decisions, is in how the justices together revisited an obscure, century-old jurisdictional doctrine, says Alex Dimitrief at Zeughauser Group.

• How High Court Pepsi Case Could Brew TM Strategy Shift

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's forthcoming decision in RiseandShine v. PepsiCo will determine whether a judge or jury decides trademark strength in infringement disputes, which could meaningfully change early-stage motion practice, discovery and what evidence is needed to prove a mark is strong, says Rachel Scobie at Merchant & Gould.

• State Of Insurance: Q2 Notes From Pennsylvania

  

  Todd Leon at Marshall Dennehey highlights notable second-quarter insurance developments in Pennsylvania, including federal court opinions providing guidance on first-party and third-party insurance coverage principles, and a pending bill seeking to regulate health insurers' use of artificial intelligence.

• High Court, SEC Proposals Set Stage For Further Fund Reform

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in FS Credit Opportunities v. Saba Capital Master Fund and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's proposed rulemaking packages aimed at public market reforms provide a constructive backdrop for considering additional innovations to the listed fund structure, say attorneys at Debevoise.

• Series

  Judges On AI: Examining Administrative, Organizational Uses

  

  U.S. District Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas examines how artificial intelligence could transform a court's ability to deal with administrative work and organize materials when preparing for hearings or drafting opinions, thereby affording judges more time to resolve contested issues.

• Why 4th Circ.'s Clean Water Act Injunction Ruling Matters

  

  The Fourth Circuit's ruling last month in West Virginia Rivers Coalition v. Chemours, holding that a Clean Water Act permit violation does not automatically create a presumption of irreparable harm that requires a preliminary injunction, avoided a dramatic change in CWA enforcement, say attorneys at Hunton.

• USPTO-Fed. Circ. Split Complicates Machine Learning Patents

  

  The wide chasm between the USPTO's and the Federal Circuit's approach to eligibility for machine learning patents means that patent drafters must avoid functional claiming and specifications if they hope to avoid invalidation of a machine learning patent at the appellate court, says attorney Michael Kiklis.

• How 9th Circ. 'Shadow Trading' Case May Affect Private Credit

  

  Private credit firms should not wait for a result in the Ninth Circuit appeal in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Panuwat to address material nonpublic information exposure under existing statutes and take steps to ensure their internal policies and surveillance are ready for increased regulatory scrutiny, says Steve Brown at StarCompliance.

• 4 Cert. Denials Keep Personal Jurisdiction Issues Percolating

  

  After the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in Ford Motor v. Montana and Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway expanded limits on personal jurisdiction, the justices' denials this term of four certiorari petitions suggest they are content to let jurisdiction questions brew in lower courts before weighing in, say attorneys at Hunton.

• Class Actions At The Circuit Courts: July Lessons

  

  In this month's review of class action appeals, Mitchell Engel at Shook Hardy discusses four recent rulings involving wage and hour allegations, medical care for incarcerated individuals, oil and gas royalty payments, and nuisance claims.