Significant developments are likely in 2025 in trade secret law, building on major cases and developments in 2024. Here are four areas to watch....more
The Virginia Court of Appeals reversed a $2 billion jury award for trade secret misappropriation under the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (VUTSA). The appellate court found error in the jury instruction for unjust...more
On May 14, 2024, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) held a webinar to provide further public guidance on compliance with its final rule that bans noncompete agreements for the vast majority of workers before it goes into...more
On April 23, 2024, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted (in a 3-2 vote along party lines) to finalize and promulgate a final rule that bans noncompete agreements for the vast majority of workers....more
The Trade Secret Litigation: Appian v. Pegasystem -
The trade secret case Appian v. Pegasystem made headlines in 2022 when a jury awarded software company Appian more than $2 billion in damages for its competitor Pega’s...more
In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies have made changes to their core business operations and instituted new practices and procedures in the blink of an eye. These changes have, perhaps unknowingly, created risks that...more
On January 8, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Henry Schein, Inc., et al. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., No. 17-1272. The Federal Arbitration Act allows parties to agree by contract that an arbitrator decide threshold...more
1/9/2019
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Arbitrators ,
Contract Terms ,
Exceptions ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Henry Schein Inc v Archer and White Sales Inc ,
Judicial Review ,
Motion to Compel ,
Question of Arbitrability ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Vacated ,
Wholly Groundless Doctrine
On June 25, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Abbott, et al. v. Perez, et al., Nos. 17-586 & 17-626. The Court held that the district court erred when it required the State to show that the 2013 Texas Legislature had "purged...more
On May 15, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, No. 16-348. The Court held that a creditor’s proof of claim that made clear that the statute of limitations to collect the debt had run was not...more
On March 31, 2016, the Supreme Court decided United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc., et al., No. 15-290, holding that an approved jurisdictional determination from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as to...more
On May 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Wittman v. Personhuballah, No. 14-1504, holding that Members of Congress from Virginia did not have standing to challenge a district court’s order finding a redistricting plan...more
On March 22, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, No. 14-1146, holding that a court may properly use representative, statistical evidence to certify a class action where each individual plaintiff...more
3/23/2016
/ Admissible Evidence ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Doffing ,
Donning ,
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) ,
SCOTUS ,
Statistical Sampling ,
Tyson Foods v Bouaphakeo ,
Unpaid Overtime ,
Wage and Hour
On March 21, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Caetano v. Massachusetts, No. 14-10078, reversing the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s decision upholding a Massachusetts law prohibiting the possession of stun guns. The...more
On March 7, 2016, the Supreme Court decided V.L. v. E.L., No. 15-648, holding that the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution requires Alabama courts to grant full faith and credit to an adoption...more
On March 1, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, No. 14-181, holding that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) pre-empts Vermont’s regulatory scheme requiring...more
On March 24, 2015, the Supreme Court decided B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., No. 13-352. The question was whether issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) can apply to decisions of the Trademark Trial and Appeal...more
3/25/2015
On February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court decided North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 13-534. The Court held that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners was not immune...more
On January 14, 2015, the Supreme Court decided T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, Georgia, No. 13-975. The Court held that the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iii), requires a locality to provide...more