Once again surprising the country by acting ten days before her own self-appointed deadline, a federal judge in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a ruling on August 20 in the Ryan v....more
8/21/2024
/ Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Competition ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Final Rules ,
FTC Act ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Unfair Competition
On April 23, 2024, the FTC announced its Final Non-Compete Clause Rule (“Final Rule”), which bans post-employment non-compete clauses between employers and their workers. The Final Rule becomes effective 120 days after being...more
6/12/2024
/ Chevron Deference ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Final Rules ,
FTC Act ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
Popular ,
Proposed Rules ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Section 5 ,
Unfair Competition
On February 16, 2023, the FTC hosted a public forum for the purpose of examining the proposed rule banning non-compete agreements. The agenda included, among other things, opening remarks from Chair Kahn, an overview of the...more
100 business organizations submitted a letter today requesting a 60 day extension on the March 20, 2023, comment period deadline on the FTC’s proposed rule banning non-competes with employees and workers. The business...more
The FTC’s proposed rule banning non-competes with employees and workers has now been published in the Federal Register....more
1/20/2023
/ Comment Period ,
Contract Terms ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
FTC Act ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
Proposed Rules ,
Public Comment ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Section 5 ,
Unfair Competition
In what may seem to be a surprising series of events, given the state’s infamous hostility to restrictive covenants, a California appellate panel recently affirmed a Los Angeles Superior Court judgment effectively enjoining...more
On September 11, 2020, the California Court of Appeal issued a decision with two crucial holdings limiting the scope of California’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL), Business and Professions Code sections 17600, et seq....more
On November 1, 2018, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District affirmed a trial court’s ruling in AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. et al., Case No. D071924, Cal. App (2018) which (1)...more
11/14/2018
/ Attorney's Fees ,
Breach of Contract ,
Confidentiality Agreements ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Declaratory Relief ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Misappropriation ,
Non-Disclosure Agreement ,
Non-Solicitation Agreements ,
Nurses ,
Popular ,
Staffing Agencies ,
Summary Judgment ,
Trade Secrets ,
Traveling Employee ,
Unfair Competition
Uber’s ongoing battle with Waymo in the Northern District of California federal court over technology used in self-driving cars provided another significant decision concerning the broad scope of trade secret preemption under...more
7/7/2017
/ Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) ,
Driverless Cars ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Misappropriation ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Preemption ,
Trade Secrets ,
Uber ,
Unfair Competition ,
Unfair Trade Practices Act
California’s Auto-Renewal Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17600 et seq.) has given rise to a recent torrent of new lawsuits in California, many brought on a putative class action basis, targeting businesses that offer...more