The circuit split recently created by the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Kalshi v. Assad has implications reaching beyond gaming regulation as, depending on the ultimate characterization of prediction market event contracts, platforms may face differing obligations under federal and state money transmission laws, say attorneys at Manatt.

Financial institutions adopting artificial intelligence for anti-money laundering compliance should implement governance specific to individual use cases, testing, documentation and human oversight to manage regulatory and enforcement risks as agentic tools expand, say attorneys at Paul Hastings.

After the U.S. Supreme Court's February decision in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump, invalidating $165 billion of presidentially imposed tariffs, consumers have filed numerous class actions seeking tariff refunds from businesses — but companies have substantial and multifaceted defenses available against these claims, say attorneys at Patterson Belknap.

The government’s mandatory detention policy for noncitizens who entered the U.S. without inspection has led to a spate of decisions this year, with nine circuits rejecting the government's reading of the Immigration and Nationality Act against two that have accepted it, making the issue ripe for U.S. Supreme Court review, says attorney Kemal Hepsen.

Taken together, two July D.C. Circuit decisions and a recent U.S. Department of Justice opinion on executive privilege may affect the procedural defenses and privilege protections available to targets of oversight in the upcoming Congress, and companies should begin preparing now, say attorneys at WilmerHale.

Recent state and Federal Trade Commission developments spotlight materially different ways in which personalized pricing might be addressed, which could result in an increasingly fragmented regulatory landscape in which businesses face differing disclosure obligations and substantive restrictions depending upon the jurisdiction, say attorneys at Proskauer.

The D.C. Circuit's recent decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration is significant for its guidance on when generic-drug labeling remains sufficiently similar to brand labeling and when a difference requires a statutory exception, says Shashank Upadhye at Upadhye Tang.

The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision to vacate a $40 million verdict awarded to Comet Technologies in its trade secret dispute with XP Power underscores how the burden of proof differs between federal and state law, giving litigants a fresh perspective on several issues, including how a jury should be instructed, say attorneys at Cooley.

Using artificial intelligence for jury research is quickly becoming part of the litigation consulting landscape, and can be a useful part of a case assessment toolkit — but litigators must understand what these systems are built to measure, and what conclusions can reasonably be drawn from their output, say Bill Kanasky and Steve Wood at Courtroom Sciences.

Recent fintech bankruptcies highlight best practices for how banks can strengthen third-party oversight, data-access rights, wind-down planning and customer communications to limit regulatory exposure and consumer harm when a fintech partner collapses, say attorneys at Barack Ferrazzano.

The Delaware Court of Chancery's recent decision in Le Clair v. KnowBe4 illustrates the high burden to which courts hold plaintiffs trying to establish a control group, as well as the continued power of an informed stockholder vote, say attorneys at Sidley.

The trajectory of legal ethics guidance in recent years strongly suggests that as redaction technology becomes more accessible, the failure to use it when uploading highly confidential materials into artificial intelligence tools will become increasingly difficult to defend as reasonable, say attorneys at Lewis Brisbois.

If upheld on appeal, a recent decision by a Minnesota appellate court — Fabyanske Westra Hart & Thomson v. Western National Mutual Insurance — will give Minnesota policyholders a stronger basis to demand independent counsel when an insurer accepts a defense under a reservation of rights, say attorneys at Stoel Rives.

States' innocent-seller statutes can shield nonmanufacturing retailers from product liability claims to varying degrees, and by building the evidentiary record strategically throughout discovery, companies can improve their chances of obtaining summary judgment — but it is essential to stay abreast of the rapidly evolving policy environment, say attorneys at Chamberlain Hrdlicka.

The U.K. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Great Asia Maritime v. Orion Shipping – upholding a "loss of bargain" damages award in a disagreement over a vessel sale – sharpens parties’ ability to contractually control damages outcomes in the event of a dispute, say lawyers at Crowell & Moring.

Agricultural company Scoular’s recently announced deferred prosecution agreement over alleged Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations at the U.S.-Mexico border reinforces the U.S. Department of Justice’s focus on cartels, and companies must accordingly ensure they address risks associated with the use of customs brokers, says Adam Safwat at Foley Hoag.

Recent data regarding patent filing activity and litigation in the cannabis and psychedelics markets indicates that as commercial interest accelerates, the scope of publicly accessible prior art is also expanding, setting a higher bar for novelty and nonobviousness in patent applications, say attorneys at Sterne Kessler.

The U.S. Department of Justice's recent settlement of allegations that OpenAI discriminated against U.S. applicants for positions connected to the permanent labor certification process underscores that employers providing or using artificial intelligence must align their recruitment practices with their overlapping compliance obligations, say attorneys at Duane Morris.

In light of the U.S. Department of Justice's decision to not prosecute Campus Eye Management under the agency's new corporate enforcement and voluntary self-disclosure policy, healthcare companies should keep several considerations in mind when weighing their risk and self-disclosure strategy, including the distinctions between reporting to the DOJ versus other government agencies, say attorneys at Haynes Boone.