Expert Analysis

• High Court's Expert Ruling May Help Health Fraud Defendants

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Diaz v. U.S. appears to give the government a powerful new tool in calling its own agents as expert witnesses, but it could also benefit defense counsel in criminal healthcare fraud and other white collar criminal cases that arise in complex legal or regulatory environments, say attorneys at Holland & Knight.

• Patent Lessons From 5 Federal Circuit Reversals In June

  

  A look at June cases where the Federal Circuit reversed or vacated decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board or a federal district court highlights a potential path for branded drugmakers to sue generic-drug makers for off-label uses, potential downsides of violating a pretrial order offering testimony, and more, say Denise De Mory and Li Guo at Bunsow De Mory.

• Jarkesy's Impact On SEC Enforcement Will Be Modest

  

  Though the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy decision found that fraud defendants have a constitutional right to a jury trial, the ruling will have muted impact on the agency’s enforcement because it’s already bringing most of its cases in federal court, say Jeremiah Williams and Alyssa Fixsen at Ropes & Gray.

• Series

  Rock Climbing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Rock climbing requires problem-solving, focus, risk management and resilience, skills that are also invaluable assets in my role as a finance lawyer, says Mei Zhang at Haynes and Boone.

• NY Ruling Offers A Foreclosure Road Map For Lenders

  

  A New York appellate court recently upheld a summary judgment ruling in favor of a commercial lender's foreclosure in U.S. Bank v. 1226 Evergreen Bapaz, illustrating the proofs lenders will need to prosecute a foreclosure action, especially where the plaintiff is an assignee of the originating lender, say attorneys at Sherman Atlas.

• What Chevron's End Means For How Congress Does Business

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo decision, overturning the Chevron doctrine, will have a far-reaching impact across the entire public policy life cycle, beginning with how Congress writes its laws and extending through agency implantation and judicial review, say attorneys at K&L Gates.

• Contract Disputes Recap: Preserving Payment Rights

  

  Stephanie Magnell and Zachary Jacobson at Seyfarth examine three recent decisions that together illustrate the importance of keeping accurate records and adhering to contractual procedures to avoid inadvertently waiving contractual rights to cost reimbursements or nonroutine payments.

• Think Like A Lawyer: Dance The Legal Standard Two-Step

  

  From rookie brief writers to Chief Justice John Roberts, lawyers should master the legal standard two-step — framing the governing standard at the outset, and clarifying why they meet that standard — which has benefits for both the drafter and reader, says Luke Andrews at Poole Huffman.

• Alice Step 2 Trends Show Courts' Extrinsic Evidence Reliance

  

  A look at recent trends in how district courts are applying Step 2 of the Alice framework shows that courts have increasingly relied on extrinsic evidence to help determine whether a claimed invention is "well-understood, routine, and conventional," says Jonathan Tuminaro at Sterne Kessler.

• Opinion

  OFAC Sanctions Deserve To Be Challenged Post-Chevron

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's Loper Bright decision opens the door to challenges against the Office of Foreign Assets Control's sanctions regime, the unintended consequences of which raise serious questions about the wisdom of what appears to be a scorched-earth approach, says Solomon Shinerock at Lewis Baach.

• How Calif. Ruling Alters Worker Arb. Agreement Enforcement

  

  The California Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Ramirez v. Charter Communications should caution employers that while workers’ arbitration agreements will no longer be deemed unenforceable based on their number of unconscionable provisions, they must still be fair and balanced, says Sander van der Heide at CDF Labor.

• Opinion

  After Jarkesy, IRS Must Course-Correct On Captive Insurance

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy decision has profound implications for other agencies, including the IRS, which must stop ignoring due process and curtailing congressional intent in its policing of captive insurance arrangements, says Peter Dawson at the 831(b) Institute.

• The Rise Of State And Local Environmental Leadership

  

  While Congress is deadlocked, and a U.S. Supreme Court with a hostility toward the administrative state aggressively dismantles federal environmental oversight, state and local governments are stepping up with policies to shape a more sustainable future for all species, says Jonathan Rosenbloom at Albany Law School.

• Questions Linger About DTSA's Scope After Motorola Ruling

  

  The Seventh Circuit’s recent ruling in Motorola v. Hytera, which held that the Defend Trade Secrets Act applies extraterritorially, does not address whether an act that furthers misappropriation must be committed by the defendant in order to satisfy the law's extraterritoriality requirement, say Ilissa Samplin and Grace Hart at Gibson Dunn.

• Series

  After Chevron: Slowing Down AI In Medical Research

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision overturning the Chevron doctrine may inhibit agencies' regulatory efforts, potentially slowing down the approval and implementation of artificial intelligence-driven methodologies in medical research, as well as regulators' responses to public health emergencies, say Ragini Acharya and Matthew Deutsch at Husch Blackwell.