Expert Analysis

• Calif. Drug Ruling Affirms Defect-Centric Liability Framework

  

  The California Supreme Court's decision in Gilead Tenofovir Cases this week rejects a novel duty-to-innovate theory of negligence that could have reshaped product liability exposure well beyond the pharmaceutical industry, instead signaling that negligence claims premised on nondefective products are unlikely to succeed, say attorneys at Dechert.

• DOJ's FCA Push Creates Risks For Construction Contractors

  

  The construction industry may be uniquely vulnerable to a new generation of False Claims Act enforcement driven by the U.S. Department of Justice's increasing usage of the FCA to target a much broader category of conduct than it has in decades past, specifically compliance certifications and regulatory representations, say attorneys at Cozen O'Connor.

• Feds' Mixed Cues On Medicaid Fraud Signal States To Step Up

  

  While the federal government has recently delivered four distinct and mutually inconsistent messages regarding Medicaid fraud enforcement, states should focus on improving enforcement, regardless of which federal posture proves correct, says Ken Levine at Stone & Magnanini.

• A Shift In How Policymakers Are Approaching PBM Regulation

  

  Recent federal and state legislative and regulatory activity involving pharmacy benefit managers represent a change in focus from transparency to PBM compensation structures, vertical integration and competitive effects, say attorneys at Barclay Damon.

• Workplace Menopause Laws Demand New HR Playbooks

  

  A recent wave of state and local legislation that makes menopause an expressly protected condition in the workplace creates new compliance obligations amid an already ambiguous federal framework, and demands a workplace culture where employees feel safe asking for support, says Elliot Griffin at Ballard Spahr.

• Calif. Wiretap Ruling May Reshape Pixel Tracking Litigation

  The recent dismissal of a proposed class action accusing Blue Shield of California of violating the federal Wiretap Act highlights the gap between legacy wiretap laws and modern browser architecture, and the tendency of pixel tracking complaints to oversimplify or mischaracterize how browsers work, says Phil Richards at ThreatHandle Consulting.

• 11th Circ. Opioid Appeal May Shift Public Nuisance Coverage

  

  The Eleventh Circuit's recent ruling certifying to the Florida and Georgia Supreme Courts the question of whether insurers must provide coverage against suits claiming policyholders improperly distributed opioids may ultimately result in a counterbalance to the Delaware line of cases denying coverage for government opioid suits, say attorneys at Pillsbury.

• Opinion

  States Should Reconsider Forced PBM Divestiture Laws

  

  State legislatures are attempting to enact policies intended to force pharmacy benefit managers to divest from pharmacies, but these laws would have the practical effect of reducing patient access and competition, potentially violating the U.S. Constitution in the process, says former Utah Attorney General John Swallow.

• Series

  Teaching SEC Investigations Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Instructing a law school course on U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigations has made me a more thoughtful, deliberate practitioner because it requires me to continually reassess and challenge what I know about securities law enforcement, how I know it and how best to explain it, says David Chase at Miami Law.

• Noncompete Laws Show States Focusing On Bans, Healthcare

  

  The first half of 2026 confirms that state legislatures are driving the most consequential changes in noncompete law, including a few state bans and several healthcare-specific laws, making a one-size-fits-all approach increasingly untenable for multistate employers, say attorneys at Faegre Drinker.

• 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.

• Rare DOJ Military Bias Suit Shows Peril Of Co. Admissions

  

  Although the government rarely litigates Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act claims against private employers, Opara v. UV Memory Care demonstrates that it will do so when an employer's own admissions build the case, potentially resulting in significant compliance obligations and long-term consequences, says Bradford Kelley at Littler.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.