Expert Analysis

The U.S. Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control continues its effort to allow U.S. persons to wind down operations or existing contracts that would otherwise violate Ukraine- and Russia-related sanctions. Even though OFAC has issued general licenses for this purpose, U.S. persons may need to obtain specific licenses to fully divest their interests, say attorneys with Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP.

In consumer class action settlements, cash provides the class and the court evaluating a proposed settlement with a quantitatively measurable benefit. Noncash settlements require heightened scrutiny by the court, since they are generally worth less to consumers than cash, and may benefit defendants and class counsel more than class members, says retired judge Thomas Dickerson.

Labell v. City of Chicago is the main case contesting the Chicago amusement tax’s application to streaming services. Todd Lard and Charles Capouet of Eversheds Sutherland LLP analyze the Cook County Circuit Court decision and discuss the plaintiffs' options on appeal.

Because cyber insurance policies are not standardized, potential differences in language could affect coverage in the General Data Protection Regulation age. Special attention should be paid to insuring language, triggers, most favored venue and jurisdiction wording, and other clauses, says Joseph Fields of Offit Kurman PA.

While the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights has been quiet recently with respect to Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act enforcement actions, the newly empowered EU data protection authorities will be eager to flex their muscles and show that the General Data Protection Regulation’s extraterritorial reach is not only real, but that noncompliance can be painful, say Nancy Libin and David Saunders of Jenner & Block LLP.

To cope with the uncertainty inherent in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's complicated fair fund distribution process, respondents can take six actions that will reduce the organizational burden and ultimately shave time, maybe even years, off the distribution timeline, says Alan Friedman of Charles River Associates.

Recent developments following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in SAS Institute make clear that inter partes review petitioners have lost the opportunity to preserve some “back pocket” invalidity arguments following an unsuccessful IPR trial, say Barbara McCurdy and Arpita Bhattacharyya of Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner LLP.

Remarks made last week by a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission official ended long-standing speculation over whether the SEC would assert jurisdiction over ether and bitcoin. The remarks also leave no doubt that the SEC aims to remain active in the digital currency markets, focusing on initial coin offerings, say attorneys with Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.

While the U.S. Supreme Court's sports betting decision appears to clear the field for esports betting in the United States, serious legal obstacles remain before we see any immediate expansion of esports betting. The industry will face intense regulatory scrutiny, say James Havel and Eric Schroeder of Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP.

While political uncertainty is pushing U.K. corporations toward defensive consolidation, inward mergers and acquisitions investment into the U.K. remains strong, with American acquirers leading the way. Factors contributing to this trend include Brexit, U.S. tax changes and saturation of the U.S. target market, say Simon Rous of Ashfords LLP and Laurie Sanders of Osborn McDerby LLP.

Companies clearly believe that training programs are the most meaningful way to reduce employee carelessness when it comes to protecting corporate assets. However, as new survey results demonstrate, these training programs are not enough to combat the careless insider, says Audra Dial of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP.

Due to the idiosyncrasies of American bankruptcy law, The Weinstein Company's recent bankruptcy filing could cause many of Harvey Weinstein’s accusers to receive pennies on the dollar relative to what they are owed under state and federal laws prohibiting workplace sexual harassment, say Matthew LaGarde and Jessica Westerman of Katz Marshall & Banks LLP.

While the adoption of the two-stage standard for collective action certification may have been born of good intention, its current interpretation strains judicial resources and forces settlement regardless of the merits of Fair Labor Standards Act litigation, say Sari Alamuddin and Allison Powers of Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP.

In a profession notoriously averse to change, it should come as no surprise that there is skepticism about the value of having attorneys perform nonbillable tasks. But U.S. law firms have slowly begun to incorporate knowledge lawyers into their operations — and the trend is likely to continue, says Vanessa Pinto Villa of Hogan Lovells.

The Ninth Circuit’s decision last month in Planned Parenthood v. Center for Medical Progress has effectively turned the anti-SLAPP motion into a hybrid of typical motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment. As a result, defendants have lost the primary benefit of the anti-SLAPP process, says Joseph Gjonola of Roxborough Pomerance Nye & Adreani LLP.

In advance of their weeklong July 4 recess, members of Congress are pursuing a busy legislative schedule, focused on the fiscal year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act and other appropriations bills, reform of export controls, immigration and border security, and the farm bill authorization, says Layth Elhassani of Covington & Burling LLP.

The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals will soon hear argument concerning whether a filing deadline set forth in the Internal Revenue Code can limit the Tax Court's ability to review decisions of the IRS Whistleblower Office. The court's ruling will affect all whistleblower appeals because the D.C. Circuit is the only court where whistleblower cases can be reviewed, says Michael DeBlis of DeBlis Law.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a major win for Washington tribes in Washington v. United States. However, the nature of the Supreme Court's affirmation — a 4-4 split without a written decision — means that its precedential value is questionable, says Lee Redeye of Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman LLP.

In the year since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California — limiting where plaintiffs can bring claims and curbing forum-shopping in mass tort litigation — courts have grappled with questions that the ruling did not address, and defendants have pursued jurisdictional defenses in class actions and federal cases that were not previously available, say attorneys with Eversheds Sutherland LLP.