Texas Ethics Opinion Flags Hazards Of Unauthorized Practice

The Texas Professional Ethics Committee's recently issued proposed opinion finding that in-house counsel providing legal services to the company's clients constitutes the unauthorized practice of law is a valuable clarification given that a UPL violation — a misdemeanor in most states — carries high stakes, say Hilary Gerzhoy and Julienne Pasichow at HWG.

6 Lessons From DOJ's 1st Controlled Drug Case In Telehealth

Following the U.S. Department of Justice’s first-ever criminal prosecution over telehealth-prescribed controlled substances in U.S. v. Ruthia He, healthcare providers should be mindful of the risks associated with restricting the physician-patient relationship when crafting new business models, says Jonathan Porter at Husch Blackwell.

Series

After Chevron: Scale Tips Favor Away From HHS Agencies

The loss of Chevron deference may indirectly aid parties in challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' interpretations of regulations and could immediately influence several pending cases challenging HHS on technical questions and agency authority, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

2 Options For Sackler Family After High Court Purdue Ruling

After the U.S. Supreme Court recently blocked Purdue Pharma's plan to shield the family that owns the company from bankruptcy lawsuits, the Sacklers face the choice to either continue litigation, or return to the bargaining table for a settlement that doesn't eliminate creditor claims, says Gregory Germain at Syracuse University.

In Memoriam: The Modern Administrative State

On June 28, the modern administrative state, where courts deferred to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes, died when the U.S. Supreme Court overruled its previous decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council — but it is survived by many cases decided under the Chevron framework, say Joseph Schaeffer and Jessica Deyoe at Babst Calland.

Series

After Chevron: Expect Limited Changes In USPTO Rulemaking

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling overturning Chevron deference will have limited consequences for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office given the USPTO's unique statutory features, but it is still an important decision for matters of statutory interpretation, especially those involving provisions of the America Invents Act, say Andrei Iancu and Cooper Godfrey at Sullivan & Cromwell.

How High Court Approached Time Limit On Reg Challenges

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Corner Post v. Federal Reserve Board effectively gives new entities their own personal statute of limitations to challenge rules and regulations, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence may portend the court's view that those entities do not need to be directly regulated, say attorneys at Snell & Wilmer.

Fed. Circ. Skinny Label Ruling Guides On Infringement Claims

The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Amarin v. Hikma shows generic drug manufacturers must pay close attention to the statements in their abbreviated new drug application labels to put themselves in the best position in defending against an induced infringement claim, say Luke Shannon and Roshan Shrestha at Taft Stettinius.

4 Takeaways From Biotech Patent Invalidity Ruling

The recent Patents Court decision in litigation between Advanced Cell Diagnostics and Molecular Instruments offers noteworthy commentary on issues related to experiments done in the ordinary course of business, joint importation, common general knowledge and mindset, and mosaicking for anticipation, say Nessa Khandaker and Darren Jiron at Finnegan.

How To Clean Up Your Generative AI-Produced Legal Drafts

As law firms increasingly rely on generative artificial intelligence tools to produce legal text, attorneys should be on guard for the overuse of cohesive devices in initial drafts, and consider a few editing pointers to clean up AI’s repetitive and choppy outputs, says Ivy Grey at WordRake.

Calif. Ruling Heightens Medical Product Maker Liability

The California Supreme Court's decision in Himes v. Somatics last month articulates a new causation standard for medical product manufacturer liability that may lead to stronger product disclosures nationwide and greater friction between manufacturers and physicians, say attorneys at Cooley.

Constitutional Protections For Cannabis Companies Are Hazy

Cannabis businesses are subject to federal enforcement and tax, but often without the benefit of constitutional protections — and the entanglement of state and federal law and conflicting judicial opinions are creating confusion in the space, says Amber Lengacher at Purple Circle.

USPTO Disclaimer Rule Would Complicate Patent Prosecution

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's proposed changes to terminal disclaimer practice could lead to a patent owner being unable to enforce a valid patent simply because it is indirectly tied to a patent in which a single claim is found anticipated or obvious in view of the prior art, say attorneys at Sterne Kessler.

Series

Boxing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

Boxing has influenced my legal work by enabling me to confidently hone the skills I've learned from the sport, like the ability to remain calm under pressure, evaluate an opponent's weaknesses and recognize when to seize an important opportunity, says Kirsten Soto at Clyde & Co.

Purdue Ch. 11 Ruling Reinforces Importance Of D&O Coverage

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, holding that a Chapter 11 reorganization cannot discharge claims against a nondebtor without affected claimants' consent, will open new litigation pathways surrounding corporate insolvency and increase the importance of robust directors and officers insurance, says Evan Bolla at Harris St. Laurent.