More Healthcare Coverage

Expert Analysis

• Heppner Ruling Left AI Privilege Risk For Lawyers Unresolved

  

  While a New York federal judge’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner resolved a privilege question surrounding client-side artificial intelligence use, it did not address how to mitigate the risks that can arise when confidential information enters the operative context of an AI system used by an attorney, says Jianfei Chen at Quarles & Brady​​​​​​​.

• Suit's Dismissal Would Not Settle Gold Card Visa's Legality

  

  The government’s recent assertion that the plaintiffs in American Association of University Professors v. Department of Homeland Security lack standing to challenge the Trump administration’s pay-to-play immigration program does not address whether an agency can deem a million-dollar gift evidence of eligibility for immigration benefits carefully defined by Congress, says Jun Li at Reid & Wise.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.

• What's At Stake For Employers In Fight Over Visa Pause

  

  For employers that rely on foreign talent, the Trump administration’s suspension of immigrant visa issuance for the nationals of 75 countries is creating practical problems, and a recently filed lawsuit challenging the pause could determine whether consular processing, for some, ceases to be an individualized process, says attorney Lisa Eisenberg.

• High Court 'Skinny Label' Case Will Matter To Tech Litigators

  

  Hikma v. Amarin, set for oral argument in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, has potential to affect not just generic drug label-based evidence in patent cases, but also how technology inducement cases are presented and proven, says attorney Abdul Abdullahi.

• Law School's Missed Lessons: How To Draft Pleadings

  

  Most law school graduates step into their first jobs without ever having drafted a complaint, answer, motion or other type of pleading, but that gap can be closed by understanding the strategy embedded in every filing, writing with clarity and purpose, and seeking feedback at every step, says Eric Yakaitis at Haug Barron.

• E-Discovery Quarterly: Recent Rulings On ESI Control

  

  Several recent federal court decisions have perpetuated a split over what constitutes “control” of electronically stored information — with judges divided on whether the standard should turn on a party's legal right or practical ability to obtain the information, say attorneys at Sidley.

• The Role Of Operational Data In Tech Platform Liability Suits

  

  As litigation becomes a de facto substitute for the regulation of major technology platforms, with plaintiffs advancing claims under product liability, public nuisance and consumer protection laws, among others, courts are evaluating how platform systems operate in practice based on large-scale operational data, say attorneys at Brattle.

• 2 Discovery Rulings Break With Heppner On AI Privilege Issue

  

  While a New York federal court’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner suggests that some litigants’ communications with AI tools are discoverable, two other recent federal court decisions demonstrate that such interactions generally qualify for work-product protection under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, says Joshua Dunn at Brown Rudnick.

• Class Actions At The Circuit Courts: April Lessons

  

  In this month's review of class action appeals, Mitchell Engel at Shook Hardy identifies practice tips from three recent rulings involving allegations of racial discrimination in mortgage applications, health insurance networks and actual cash value losses.

• Judicial Restraint Anchors Constitutional Order

  

  Contrasting opinions in two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings — Trump v. CASA and Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections — demonstrate how the judiciary’s constitutionally entrusted role can easily be preserved or disrupted, and invite renewed attention to the enduring importance of judicial restraint, says Ninth Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace.

• What A Court Doc Audit Reveals About Erroneous Filings

  

  My audit of 1,522 court documents from last month found that over 95% contained at least one verifiable error, with fewer than 1% showing clear indicators of artificial intelligence use — highlighting above all else that lawyers may want to focus most on strengthening their review processes, says Elliott Ash at ETH Zurich.

• Similar-Looking Designs May Not Always Prove Infringement

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Range of Motion Products v. Armaid is a reminder that even a strikingly similar design might not be found to infringe upon a patented design once design features driven by functionality are filtered out from consideration, say attorneys at BCLP.