Expert Analysis

• 6 Joint-Inventorship Lessons From Fed. Circ.'s Hormel Ruling

  

  The recent Federal Circuit ruling in HIP v. Hormel, finding that David Howard of HIP was not a joint inventor of a Hormel patent, offers patent litigation and application tips, like discussing any work performed under a joint research agreement and assigning invention ownership rights to a specific entity, say attorneys at BCLP.

• Mootness Fees Are Losing Traction In Del. And Federal Courts

  

  The Delaware Chancery's recent decision in Anderson v. Magellan Health deals a significant blow to plaintiffs attorneys seeking mootness fees for merger litigation brought in that state, and federal courts are trending in the same direction, say Paul Marino and Michael Fialkoff at Day Pitney.

• Opinion

  Justices' Job Transfer Review Should Hold To Title VII Text

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's upcoming decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis should hold that a job transfer can be an adverse employment action, and the analysis should be based on the straightforward language of Title VII rather than judicial activism, say Lynne Bernabei and Alan Kabat at Bernabei & Kabat.

• Immigration Program Pitfalls Exacerbate Physician Shortages

  

  Eliminating shortcomings from U.S. immigration regulations and policies could help mitigate the national shortage of physicians by encouraging foreign physicians to work in medically underserved areas, but progress has been halted by partisan gridlock, say Alison Hitz and Dana Schwarz at Clark Hill.

• Perspectives

  Mallory Gives Plaintiffs A Better Shot At Justice

  

  Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern claim it opens the door to litigation tourism, but the ruling simply gives plaintiffs more options — enabling them to seek justice against major corporations in the best possible court, say Rayna Kessler and Ethan Seidenberg at Robins Kaplan.

• 9th Circ. Gap Ruling Creates Split On Forum Selection Clause

  

  The Ninth Circuit recently held in Lee v. Fisher that a forum selection clause in Gap's bylaws requiring all derivative claims to be brought in Delaware state court is enforceable, but since the Seventh Circuit struck down a similar clause in Boeing's bylaws last year, Supreme Court review may be on the horizon, say attorneys at Davis Polk.

• Courts Can Overturn Deficient State Regulations, Too

  

  While suits challenging federal regulations have become commonplace, such cases against state agencies are virtually nonexistent, but many states have provisions that allow litigants to bring suit for regulations with inadequate cost-benefit analyses, says Reeve Bull at the Virginia Office of Regulatory Management.

• 'Entire Fairness' Takeaways From Tesla-SolarCity Ruling

  

  In its recent decision affirming dismissal of stockholder claims against Elon Musk in connection with Tesla's $2.6 billion acquisition of SolarCity, the Delaware Supreme Court indicated how an entire fairness analysis is best presented, say attorneys at Fried Frank.

• How Construction Industry Can Help Mitigate Wildfire Impact

  

  The recent uptick of wildfires across North America has resulted in renewed calls for construction job site changes and increased management of sites in order to mitigate the risk of outbreaks and workers' exposure to hazardous air quality, say Josephine Bahn and Jeffery Mullen at Cozen O'Connor.

• Tales From The Trenches Of Remote Depositions

  

  As practitioners continue to conduct depositions remotely in the post-pandemic world, these virtual environments are rife with opportunities for improper behavior such as witness coaching, scripted testimony and a general lack of civility — but there are methods to prevent and combat these behaviors, say Jennifer Gibbs and Bennett Moss at Zelle.

• 3 Ways Courts Approach Patent Eligibility At Trial And After

  

  Sorin Zaharia and Mark Liang at O’Melveny analyze all 36 district court cases where patent eligibility under Section 101 was decided at trial or post-trial after Alice, specifically focusing on how different districts address step two of the Alice inquiry, as well as the impact of each approach on the outcome.

• Employer Drug-Testing Policies Must Evolve With State Law

  

  As multistate employers face ongoing challenges in drafting consistent marijuana testing policies due to the evolving patchwork of state laws, they should note some emerging patterns among local and state statutes to ensure compliance in different jurisdictions, say attorneys at Troutman Pepper.

• Disney Investor Suit Shows Limit Of Del. Books, Records Law

  

  While Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law remains an important shareholder tool to obtain access to corporate books and records, the Delaware Chancery Court's recent decision in Simeone v. Disney illustrates the extent that judges will allow the use of Section 220 to scrutinize disagreements about corporate speech on ESG issues, say Stephen Kraftschik and Robert Penza at Polsinelli.

• Challenging Standing In Antitrust Class Actions: Timing

  

  The early resolution of Article III standing disputes in antitrust class actions can result in sizable efficiencies, but some litigants and courts are improperly relying on the Amchem and Ortiz U.S. Supreme Court cases to defer standing issues until after ruling on plaintiffs' class certification motions, say Michael Hamburger and Holly Tao at White & Case.

• Level Up Lawyers' Business Development With Gamification

  

  With employee engagement at a 10-year low in the U.S., there are several gamification techniques marketing and business development teams at law firms can use to make generating new clients and matters more appealing to lawyers, says Heather McCullough at Society 54.