COVERAGE
FTC, State Scrutiny of Noncompetes Shifts Labor Market
July 17, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 17, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 18, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 23, 2024
Read time: 2 min
Dr. Matthias Kampshoff and Dr. Jens Ortmanns discussed the full-service offering and strategy of McDermott Will & Emery in Germany and the next stages of the firm’s development in an interview with Börsen-Zeitung.

COVERAGE
July 22, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 22, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 2024
Read time: 3 min
In his latest article for The Bankruptcy Strategist titled, “Appellate Courts Skeptical About Bankruptcy Court Sanctions,” Schulte Roth & Zabel of counsel Michael L. Cook discusses recent appellate decisions showing a distaste for appeals from bankruptcy court sanction orders. A split Fourth Circuit even refused to hear such an appeal. Other courts tend to limit sanctions or, alternatively, accept a bankruptcy judge’s findings under a stringent “abuse of discretion” standard.
The Fifth Circuit, for example, takes a balanced approach. “[Bankruptcy courts have only civil contempt powers because that is all Congress has given them …. Accordingly, bankruptcy courts may issue contempt orders, but any contempt sanction imposed by a bankruptcy court must be civil” — compensatory, not punitive. In re Highland Capital Management, 2024 WL 1450065, *2 (5th Cir. Apr. 4, 2024) (2-1). Accord, In re Markus, 78 F.4th 554, 563 n.5 (2d Cir. 2023). A split Fourth Circuit, as noted, went further: a bankruptcy court’s “civil contempt and sanctions orders … for violating a discovery order are interlocutory and cannot be immediately appealed as of right.” In re Bestwall, LLC, 2024 WL 1841960, (4th Cir. Apr. 29, 2024) (2-1). The Second Circuit takes a more nuanced approach. PHH Mortg. Corp. v Senesenich (In re Gravel), 6 F. 4th 503, 511, 513 (2d Cir. 2021). (“A bankruptcy court’s award of sanctions, including findings of contempt, are reviewed [on appeal] for abuse of discretion;” reviewed under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d)(2)(A) (after certification); “this court has a duty to conduct its own ‘exacting’ review of contempt orders;” bankruptcy court cannot “hold a party in contempt for violating an order that is subject to varying interpretations”).
Read the article here.

COVERAGE
July 17, 2024
Read time: 3 min
Last month, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) celebrated its one-year anniversary after it launched in 17 countries across Europe. During this time, it has significantly impacted many industries and fields, including medical devices, pharmaceuticals and various electronics. Decisions on key issues have undoubtedly contributed to the UPC’s growth, already establishing the new court as a popular venue for patent disputes.
In this article, Chuck Larsen, Aashish Kapadia and Charles de Raignac explore the significant decisions that are shaping the court’s direction, particularly in transatlantic disputes. Patent holders should be aware of these decisions and stay attuned of upcoming decisions that will continue to develop the UPC’s law and practice and shape its future usage.
Karen Gover contributed to the development of this article.

COVERAGE
July 18, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 18, 2024
Read time: 2 min

COVERAGE
July 18, 2024
Read time: 2 min
The US Supreme Court recently decided a high-profile constitutional issue that has far-reaching implications for the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and its enforcement authority. The Supreme Court’s ruling in SEC v. Jarkesy limits the SEC’s ability to bring enforcement actions seeking penalties in its own administrative courts, requiring the SEC to bring its actions in federal court before an Article III judge instead.
In this article, Paul Helms, Caitlyn Campbell and DC Wolf examine the decision and the implications of limiting the reach of SEC administrative proceedings.