Expert Analysis

• Divergent Decisions Highlight Uncertainty Of IPR Estoppel

  

  Two federal court decisions last month reached opposite conclusions regarding when defendants can rely on prior art to avoid discretionary denial of inter partes review challenges, creating confusion around the viability of Sotera stipulations, say Harper Batts and Li Guo at Sheppard Mullin.

• In Arbitration, Consider The Influence Of State Laws

  

  A California appellate court's recent refusal, based in state law, to compel arbitration in Barraza v. Tesla illustrates the importance of understanding substantive and procedural differences between state arbitration law and the Federal Arbitration Act — and when those distinctions can alter case outcomes, says Richard Mason at MasonADR.

• Ghosting In BigLaw: Why Better Feedback Habits Are Needed

  

  Not giving assignments or constructive criticism to junior associates can significantly affect their performance and hours, potentially leading them to leave the firm, but partners can prevent this by asking the right questions and creating a culture of feedback, says Rachel Patterson at Orrick.

• Rebuttal

  Law Needs A Balance Between Humanism And Formalism

  

  A recent Law360 guest article rightly questions the pretextual pseudo-originalism that permits ideology to masquerade as judicial philosophy, but the cure would kill the patient because directness, simplicity and humanness are achievable without renouncing form or sacrificing stare decisis, says Vanessa Kubota at the Arizona Court of Appeals.

• Short Message Data Challenges In E-Discovery

  

  As short message platforms increasingly dominate work environments, lawyers face multiple programs, different communication styles and emoji in e-discovery, so they must consider new strategies to adapt their processes, says Cristin Traylor at Relativity.

• Opinion

  Thomas Report Is Final Straw — High Court Needs Ethics Code

  

  As a recent report on Justice Clarence Thomas' ongoing conflicts of interest makes evident, Supreme Court justices should be subject to an enforceable and binding code of ethics — like all other federal judges — to maintain the credibility of the institution, says Erica Salmon Byrne at Ethisphere.

• Joint Representation Ethics Lessons From Ga. Electors Case

  

  The Fulton County district attorney's recent motion to disqualify an attorney from representing her elector clients, claiming a nonconsentable conflict of interest, raises key questions about representing multiple clients related to the same conduct and highlights potential pitfalls, say Hilary Gerzhoy and Grace Wynn at HWG.

• Lawyer Discernment Is Critical In The World Of AI

  

  In light of growing practical concerns about risks and challenges posed by artificial intelligence, lawyers' experience with the skill of discernment will position them to help address new ethical and moral dilemmas and ensure that AI is developed and deployed in a way that benefits society as a whole, says Jennifer Gibbs at Zelle.

• Opinion

  It's Time For Lawyers To Stand Up For Climate Justice

  

  The anniversary this week of the Deepwater Horizon disaster offers an opportunity for attorneys to embrace the practice of just transition lawyering — leveraging our skills to support communities on the front lines of climate change and environmental catastrophe as they pursue rebuilding and transformation, says Amy Laura Cahn at Taproot Earth.

• Don't Forget Alumni Engagement When Merging Law Firms

  

  Neglecting law firm alumni programs after a merger can sever the deep connections attorneys have with their former firms, but by combining good data management and creating new opportunities to reconnect, firms can make every member in their expanded network of colleagues feel valued, say Clare Roath and Erin Warner at Troutman Pepper.

• Without Stronger Due Diligence, Attys Risk AML Regulation

  

  Amid increasing pressure to mitigate money laundering and terrorism financing risks in gatekeeper professions, the legal industry will need to clarify and strengthen existing client due diligence measures — or risk the federal regulation attorneys have long sought to avoid, says Jeremy Glicksman at the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office.

• Every Lawyer Can Act To Prevent Peer Suicide

  

  Members of the legal industry can help prevent suicide among their colleagues, and better protect their own mental health, by learning the predictors and symptoms of depression among attorneys and knowing when and how to get practical aid to peers in crisis, says Joan Bibelhausen at Minnesota Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers.

• Building On Successful Judicial Assignment Reform In Texas

  

  Prompt action by the Judicial Conference could curtail judge shopping and improve the efficiency and procedural fairness of the federal courts by implementing random districtwide assignment of cases, which has recently proven successful in Texas patent litigation, says Dabney Carr at Troutman Pepper.

• Do Videoconferences Establish Jurisdiction With Defendants?

  

  What it means to have minimum contacts in a foreign jurisdiction is changing as people become more accustomed to meeting via video, and defendants’ participation in videoconferencing may be used as a sword or a shield in courts’ personal jurisdiction analysis, says Patrick Hickey at Moye White.

• Opinion

  Humanism Should Replace Formalism In The Courts

  

  The worrying tendency for judges to say "it's just the law talking, not me" in American decision writing has coincided with an historic decline in respect for the courts, but this trend can be reversed if courts develop understandable legal standards and justify them in human terms, says Connecticut Superior Court Judge Thomas Moukawsher.