Expert Analysis

• Mich. Ruling Gives Consumer Protection Law Its Teeth Back

  

  The Michigan Supreme Court's recent decision in Attorney General v. Eli Lilly, overruling key holdings in two earlier cases, means that Michigan businesses can no longer defeat allegations of deceptive conduct under the state's consumer protection law simply by pointing to any governmental regulation of the business, say attorneys at DiCello Levitt.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Surviving A Long Trial

  

  Most of law school trial advocacy is geared toward the sprint of trying a short case, but beyond managing a cross-examination or closing argument, effectively handling the marathon of a lengthy trial requires the ability to maintain composure, organization and credibility with the jury, says Mihir Elchuri at Hirschler.

• AI Chatbot's Medical Claims Highlight Enforcement Risks

  

  The Pennsylvania State Board of Medicine's recent lawsuit against Character Technologies, arguing that an artificial intelligence chatbot engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine, may provide other state licensing boards with a road map for going after AI platforms, and counsel should advise clients to calibrate compliance accordingly, say attorneys at Cooley.

• 7th Circ. Ruling May Reduce Litigation Risk For Text Marketers

  

  The recent Seventh Circuit holding in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services that unwanted marketing text messages are not telephone calls under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act may strengthen companies' responses to presuit demand letters and early-stage litigation claims premised on do-not-call text theories, say attorneys at Holland & Knight.

• How Calif. Ruling Defines Drug Cos.' R&D Responsibilities

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent ruling in the Gilead Tenofovir Cases, which held that drugmakers have no duty to bring allegedly safer alternatives to market more quickly, is a win for pharmaceutical companies — but not a grant of blanket immunity for all early-stage drug development decisions, say attorneys at King & Spalding.

• Midyear Trends, Takeaways As Securities Class Actions Surge

  

  High numbers of securities class actions through June suggest filings will stay elevated, with factors like changing enforcement attitudes, media scrutiny and the proliferation of potential defendants serving as both cause and effect in increased litigation involving AI-related disclosures, health and tech companies, and foreign issuers, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Series

  Going To Hardcore Shows Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  While government contracts law and the hardcore scene may seem entirely unrelated, in my experience, both are about community, focus, being prepared for the unexpected and managing chaos, says Isaac Natter at Fluet.

• How Home Infusion Providers Can Adapt To Enrollment Pause

  

  Recent Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moratoria on new enrollments of home health agencies, medical equipment companies and hospices make home infusion providers' compliance obligations more complex and ambiguous, requiring new careful consideration of specific enrollment requirements and limitations, say attorneys at Quarles & Brady.

• USPTO Practitioner Roster Reflects A More Veteran Workforce

  

  An analysis of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Office of Enrollment and Discipline practitioner roster reveals a widening demographic imbalance between new practitioners and those with more experience, but despite this trend, an expected falloff in practitioner numbers has yet to arrive, says Ian Schick at Paximal.

• How 'Markedly Different' Test Shapes Patent Eligibility Debate

  

  Following last month's U.S. Senate hearing on the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, it is important to examine how courts and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office have applied the 46-year-old "markedly different characteristics" framework to determine eligibility of composition-of-matter claims, say attorneys at WilmerHale.

• Opinion

  2nd Circ. Tylenol Ruling Misapplies Daubert Gatekeeping

  

  The Second Circuit's recent ruling in Rutledge v. Walgreen Co., holding that a lower court should not have excluded experts alleging links between prenatal acetaminophen use and autism, threatens to swallow the Daubert standard by limiting courts' consideration of scientific consensus in assessing reliability of expert testimony, say attorneys at Benesch.

• 5 Antitrust Lessons On Bundled Discounts After Medtronic

  

  The recent California federal court decision upholding a $381.7 million verdict against Medtronic offers practitioners a clearer road map for navigating bundled discount claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and the practical implications are substantial, say attorneys at Norton Rose.

• Opinion

  After Monsanto, Defense Bar Must Build Case Against Lohr

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Monsanto v. Durnell has helped to demolish the foundation for its problematic 1996 ruling in Medtronic v. Lohr — so now defense counsel should lay the groundwork for the high court to overturn Lohr, say attorneys at Blank Rome.

• A New Era Of Scrutiny For China-Linked Pharma Deals

  

  As Congress considers bipartisan legislation that would heighten regulatory scrutiny for life sciences deals involving Chinese biotech entities, companies should reassess the risks and due diligence requirements that will come with using heavily China-dependent pipelines, says Jen Maki at Ankura.

• Series

  Being A Sommelier Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Being a sommelier has quietly shaped how I practice law by changing the way I think, communicate and connect with people, and offers a constant reminder that expertise is about making your knowledge useful and accessible to others, says Kara Du at Sheppard.