Expert Analysis

• 2 Cases Shed Light On Invoking The 5th Before Congress

  

  Given the anticipated increase in congressional investigations following the midterm elections, those who anticipate being in Congress' spotlight can draw valuable Fifth Amendment lessons from the ongoing case involving Dr. Anthony Fauci's testimony and the D.C. Circuit’s recent ruling in de la Torre v. Cassidy, say attorneys at King & Spalding.

• Loper Bright Unlikely To Upend DEA Rescheduling Challenges

  

  As cannabis industry stakeholders await a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration ruling on broader cannabis rescheduling, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Loper Bright to eliminate judicial deference to agency decisions should not dramatically affect cannabis rescheduling litigation risk, but it could marginally strengthen proponents' hand if the DEA denies rescheduling, say attorneys at Dentons.

• Vanda Ruling Offers New Guide To Generic Labeling Disputes

  

  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.

• Attorneys Using AI May Have Ethical Duty To Redact Docs

  

  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.

• Cannabis, Psychedelics Boom Raises IP Hurdles

  

  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.

• State AI Safety Laws Raise New Liabilities For Healthcare Cos.

  

  Healthcare and life science companies using third-party artificial intelligence tools should pay particular attention to the changing state-level legal landscape, where the rollout of multiple AI safety laws is introducing both new compliance obligations and potential consumer protection liabilities, say attorneys at McDermott.

• Series

  Juggling And Unicycling Make Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Because I juggle (sometimes with fire) and ride the unicycle, friends and family used to joke that I should join the circus, but I pursued the practice of law instead and learned that my hobbies benefit my profession in several important ways, says Morgan Eddy at Smith Currie.

• AI Note-Taking Suits May Fill Gap In Privacy Law Structure

  

  A recent class action against Granola joins other pending lawsuits against AI note-taking providers, highlighting the legal uncertainty surrounding these tools, but there are practical steps companies using "invisible" AI services can take to mitigate risk, including conducting inventories and reviewing access permissions, say attorneys at Barnes & Thornburg.

• FDA Closeout Letter Suggests Relaxing Stance On Wearables

  

  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recent decision not to pursue enforcement action against Whoop's wearable blood pressure tracker, read together with guidance released earlier this year, suggests a softer shift in the FDA's approach to regulating wearables, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Fed. Circ. Dental IP Ruling Reinforces Prior Art Framework

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Dental Monitoring v. Align Technology reaffirms the necessity of substantive written description support for establishing an earlier effective prior art date under the America Invents Act, and aligns Patent Trial and Appeal Board practice with district court litigation, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Justices' Hikma Reasoning May Extend Well Beyond Pharma

  

  The active steps framework announced by the U.S. Supreme Court in its Hikma v. Amarin decision, finding that Amarin failed to plausibly allege inducement of infringement, has the potential to reshape how courts evaluate inducement claims across patent, copyright and other doctrines, say attorneys at BCLP.

• Teva MDL Loss Shows DPAs Can Return To Haunt Civil Suits

  

  Teva’s recent partial summary judgment loss in antitrust multidistrict litigation reinforces the importance of carefully scrutinizing any statement of facts a company admits to in a deferred prosecution agreement, and illustrates the potential costs of resolving a criminal investigation this way, say attorneys at Sheppard.

• An Inside Look At Squires' Discretionary Denials

  

  A deep dive into the discretionary denials issued by U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director John Squires since he took over last year identifies trends in commonly asserted arguments and how they correlate with institution outcomes, say attorneys at Kirkland & Ellis.

• Series

  Ballet Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  A lifetime of learning and performing ballet taught me that success — whether in dance or practicing law — comes only through hours of thorough preparation, boundless energy and relentless effort, says Sharon Katz-Pearlman at Greenberg Traurig.

• Fed. Circ. In July: Meeting The Enablement Requirement

  

  The Federal Circuit's decision in Wyeth v. AstraZeneca last month exemplifies when a generalized conception of an invention is insufficient to enable the full scope of asserted patent infringement claims, and may lead to more enablement challenges, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.