Expert Analysis

• Tackling Judge-Shopping Concerns While Honoring Localism

  

  As the debate continues over judge-shopping and case assignments in federal court, policymakers should look to a hybrid model that preserves the benefits of localism for those cases that warrant it, while preventing the appearance of judge-shopping for cases of a more national or widespread character, says Joshua Sohn at the U.S. Department of Justice.

• Perspectives

  How Attorneys Can Help Combat Anti-Asian Hate

  

  Amid an exponential increase in violence against Asian American and Pacific Islander communities, unique obstacles stand in the way of accountability and justice — but lawyers can effect powerful change by raising awareness, offering legal representation, advocating for victims’ rights and more, say attorneys at Gibson Dunn.

• Opinion

  Congress Needs To Enact A Federal Anti-SLAPP Statute

  

  Although many states have passed statutes meant to prevent individuals or entities from filing strategic lawsuits against public participation, other states have not, so it's time for Congress to enact a federal statute to ensure that free speech and petitioning rights are uniformly protected nationwide in federal court, say attorneys at Skadden.

• JetBlue-American Ruling Offers Fresh Angle On Antitrust Risk

  

  The District of Massachusetts' recent decision that the JetBlue-American Airlines pact combining some Northeastern operations violates the Sherman Act stands as a reminder that collaborations between competitors can warrant close scrutiny — even if they create real, tangible benefits for consumers, say Benjamin Dryden and Elizabeth Haas at Foley & Lardner.

• Dealing With Dogmatic Jurors: Voir Dire And Trial Strategies

  

  Dogmatic jurors — whose rigid reliance on external authority can inhibit accurate, objective decision making — may be both good and bad for plaintiffs and defense counsel, so attorneys should understand how to identify such jurors in voir dire and how to meet them where they are during trial, say consultants at Courtroom Sciences.

• Trending At The PTAB: IPR Estoppel After Ironburg

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent Ironburg v. Valve decision does not make clear how patent owners could attempt to meet the burden of abiding by its rules for litigating inter partes review estoppel for references not asserted in a petition, but arguments in the case offer a clue, say attorneys at Finnegan.

• Some Client Speculations On AI And The Law Firm Biz Model

  

  Generative artificial intelligence technologies will put pressure on the business of law as it is structured currently, but clients may end up with more price certainty for legal services, and lawyers may spend more time being lawyers, says Jonathan Cole at Melody Capital.

• Seeking Compassionate Release Under New Health Guidelines

  

  Though the U.S. Sentencing Commission recently changed its guidelines to allow prisoners who claim they are receiving inadequate medical care to apply for compassionate release, defense counsel will need to come armed with the correct case law and supporting medical documentation to successfully file for sentence reductions, say Marissa Kingman and Krista Hartrum at Fox Rothschild.

• A Lawyer's Guide To Approaching Digital Assets In Discovery

  

  The booming growth of cryptocurrency and non-fungible tokens has made digital assets relevant in many legal disputes but also poses several challenges for discovery, so lawyers must garner an understanding of the technology behind these assets, the way they function, and how they're held, says Brett Sager at Ehrenstein Sager.

• Opinion

  High Court's Ethics Statement Places Justices Above The Law

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court justices' disappointing statement on the court's ethics principles and practices reveals that not only are they satisfied with a status quo in which they are bound by fewer ethics rules than other federal judges, but also that they've twisted the few rules that do apply to them, says David Janovsky at the Project on Government Oversight.

• High Court Amgen Patent Ruling Promotes Medical Innovation

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision last week in Amgen v. Sanofi — the first to enforce the patent enablement requirement in a biotech setting — will be enormously impactful, affecting patent drafting, litigation and licensing, and investment in research and development for life-changing therapies, says Irena Royzman at Kramer Levin.

• What's Unique — And What's Not — In Trump Protective Order

  

  A Manhattan judge's recent protective order limiting former President Donald Trump's access to evidence included restrictions uniquely tailored to the defendant, which should remind defense attorneys that it's always a good idea to fight these seemingly standard orders, says Julia Jayne at Jayne Law.

• Opinion

  Time For Law Schools To Rethink Unsung Role Of Adjuncts

  

  As law schools prepare for the fall 2023 semester, administrators should reevaluate the role of the underappreciated, indispensable adjunct, and consider 16 concrete actions to improve the adjuncts' teaching experience, overall happiness and feeling of belonging, say T. Markus Funk at Perkins Coie, Andrew Boutros at Dechert and Eugene Volokh at UCLA.

• Perspectives

  Why Trump Sexual Abuse Verdict May Be Hard To Replicate

  

  Survivors of sexual assault may be emboldened to file suit after writer E. Jean Carroll’s trial victory against former President Donald Trump, but before assigning too much significance to the verdict, it’s worth noting that the case’s unique constellation of factors may make it the exception rather than the rule, says Jessica Roth at Cardozo School of Law.

• Tips For In-House Legal Leaders In A Challenging Economy

  

  Amid today's economic and geopolitical uncertainty, in-house legal teams are running lean and facing increased scrutiny and unique issues, but can step up and find innovative ways to manage outcomes and capitalize on good business opportunities, says Tim Parilla at LinkSquares.