Expert Analysis

• DOJ Innovasis Settlement Offers Lessons On Self-Disclosure

  

  The recent $12 million settlement with Innovasis and two of its executives demonstrates the U.S. Department of Justice's continued prioritization of Anti-Kickback Statute enforcement amid the growing circuit split over causation, and illustrates important nuances surrounding self-disclosure, say Denise Barnes and Scott Gallisdorfer at Bass Berry.

• 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.

• Behind The Delay Of Final HSR Premerger Filing Rules

  

  Erin Toomey at Epiq discusses the wait for the final version of the revised Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger filing requirements that were first introduced in June 2023, the factors that might be behind the delay, and how to plan for the potential data-focused rule change

• 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.

• Congress Quietly Amends FEPA: What Cos. Should Do Now

  

  Last week, Congress revised the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act — passed last year to criminalize demand-side foreign bribery — to address inconsistencies and better harmonize the law with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and companies should review their compliance programs accordingly, say Mark Mendelsohn and Benjamin Klein at Paul Weiss.

• Why FDIC Banks May Want To Consider Fed Membership

  

  With the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. recently ratcheting up bank supervision and proposing idiosyncratic new policies, state-chartered nonmember banks may want to explore the benefits of becoming Federal Reserve members and consider practical steps to make the switch, say Max Bonici and Connor Webb at Venable.

• Del. 3M Ruling Risks Upending Corporate Insurance Programs

  

  A Delaware court's findings last week in the 3M earplug insurance litigation that a parent company's defense fee payments don't count toward a subsidiary's self-insured retention and that an insurer's duty to pay defense costs doesn't attach to multidistrict litigation merit closer scrutiny in light of the modern corporate form and the fundamental objectives of MDLs, say Julie Hammerman and Gary Thompson at Thompson HD.

• NYSE Delisting May Be The Cost Of FCPA Compliance

  

  ABB’s recent decision to delist its U.S. depository receipts from the New York Stock Exchange, coupled with having settled three Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement actions, begs the question of whether the cost of FCPA compliance should factor into a company's decision to remain listed in the U.S., says John Joy at FTI Law.

• Opinion

  The FTC Needs To Challenge The Novo-Catalent Deal

  

  Novo's acquisition of Catalent threatens to substantially lessen competition in the manufacturing and marketing of GLP-1 diabetes and obesity drugs, and the Federal Trade Commission should challenge it under a vertical theory of harm, as it aligns with last year's merger guidelines and the Fifth Circuit decision in Illumina, says attorney David Balto.

• 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.

• What High Court TM Rulings Tell Us About Free Speech

  

  Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings show tension between free speech and trademark law, highlighting that while political mockery is protected, established brands may be forced to adapt to evolving cultural values, says William Scott Goldman at Goldman Law Group.

• Series

  Being A Luthier Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  When I’m not working as an appellate lawyer, I spend my spare time building guitars — a craft known as luthiery — which has helped to enhance the discipline, patience and resilience needed to write better briefs, says Rob Carty at Nichols Brar.

• Series

  After Chevron: Uncertainty In Scope Of ITC Oversight

  

  The U.S. International Trade Commission's long-standing jurisprudence on some of the most disputed and controversial issues is likely to be reshaped by the Federal Circuit, which is no longer bound by Chevron deference in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, say Kecia Reynolds and Madeleine Moss at Paul Hastings.

• Half-Truths Vs. Omissions: Slicing Justices' Macquarie Cake

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Macquarie v. Moab provides a road map for determining whether corporate reports that omit information should be considered misleading — and the court baked it into a dessert analogy that is key to understanding the guidelines, say Daniel Levy and Pavithra Kumar at Advanced Analytical Consulting Group.