Zapproved has published its updated Preservation Case Law Summaries 2008-2016, the definitive guide to preservation case law with summaries tagged by venue, sanction and topic.

The guide can be downloaded from Zapproved’s website.

Zapproved says courts are analyzing preservation cases for spoliation with a high bar to determine if awarding sanctions is appropriate. The standards set forth in proposed changes to Rule 37(e) require that in order to impose an adverse inference, spoliation must have (i) caused substantial prejudice in the litigation and the result of  willfulness or bad faith; or (ii) irreparably deprived a party of any meaningful opportunity to present or defend against the claims in the litigation.

The new version contains these most recent preservation cases:

• Noble Roman’s, Inc. v. Hattenhauer Distrib. Co.
• Living Color Enters. v. New Era Aquaculture, Ltd.
• First Fin. Sec., Inc. v. Lee
• Brown Jordan Int’l, Inc. v. Carmiclet
• In re Takata Airbag Prods. Liab. Litig.
• Best Payphones, Inc. v. The City of New York

Download the guide.

Nine practice groups and 23 individual attorneys with Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP have been recognized in the annual Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.

“We are thankful to our clients and peers for providing Chambers USA with the positive input that helped us achieve our recognition,” says Gardere Chair Holland N. O’Neil. “The Firm’s inclusion in these prestigious rankings is a testament to our attorneys’ hard work and the level of service we are committed to delivering our clients.”

The firm’s Energy: Oil & Gas (Transactional) and Leisure & Hospitality practices once again received national recognition in the publication. In addition, partner Joyce Mazero, co-chair of the firm’s global supply network, received the prestigious Band 1 national ranking in Franchising for the ninth consecutive year. In the publication, she is lauded by her clients for her business acumen, with one stating in the publication that “she has a practical business focus in what she does and I’ve seen that proven over and over.”

The following Gardere attorneys also received individual national Chambers recognition:

Marshall J. Doke Jr. – Government: Government Contracts
Douglas K. Eyberg – Energy: Oil & Gas (Transactional)
Leonard H. (Len) MacPhee – Franchising
Cynthia Brotman (Cindy) Nelson – Leisure & Hospitality
Clifford J. Risman – Leisure & Hospitality
N. L. (Larry) Stevens III – Energy: Oil & Gas (Transactional)

In the publication, Gardere clients stated that the firm provides “excellent, totally dedicated client service. It’s as good as it gets,” and noted, “Their level of knowledge and experience is high and that enables them to give practical and focused advice.”

The following firm practices were recognized among the best in Texas: Antitrust, Bankruptcy/Restructuring, Corporate/M&A, Environment, Insurance, Labor & Employment and Real Estate.

Additionally, these Gardere attorneys received individual Chambers recognition for their work in Texas:

Val J. Albright – Tax: Litigation
Chris Converse – Corporate/M&A
Craig B. Florence –  Litigation: General Commercial
Ronald M. Gaswirth – Labor & Employment
Randy D. Gordon –  Antitrust
Kevin L. Kelley – Real Estate
Stephen A. McCartin –  Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Andres S. Medrano –  Energy: State Regulatory & Litigation (Electricity)
John P. Melko – Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Holland N. O’Neil – Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Alan J. Perkins – Corporate/M&A
Frances E. Phillips –  Environment
Clifford J. Risman –  Real Estate
Deirdre B. Ruckman – Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Rachel Powitzky Steely – Labor & Employment
Peter S. Vogel – Technology: Corporate & Commercial
Kimberly A. Yelkin –  Insurance Regulation

Chambers and Partners uses phone interviews with thousands of attorneys and clients to identify lawyers and law firms that demonstrate qualities most valued by clients, such as legal ability, professional conduct, client service, diligence and commitment.

Law firm Quarles & Brady LLP has announced that 46 attorneys from the firm’s offices have been ranked in the 2016 edition of the Chambers USA directory.

“We are very proud of the recognition earned in Chambers by our attorneys,” said Kimberly Leach Johnson, firm chair of Quarles & Brady. “I know this honor is the result of great dedication and insight. Our focus on excellence is demonstrated by the service provided and this recognition is proof positive of that focus.”

Quarles & Brady attorneys were ranked as follows:

• Jean C. Baker – Intellectual Property
• David A. Beyer – Franchising
• David L. Bourne – Banking & Finance
• Daniel E. Conley – Litigation: General Commercial
• John F. Dienelt – Franchising
• Joseph A. Drazek – Environment (including water rights)
• Robert H. Duffy – Labor & Employment
• Steven P. Emerick – Corporate/M&A
• Mary N. Fertl – Real Estate
• Michael J. Fischer – Labor & Employment
• Diane M. Haller – Real Estate
• Patricia M. Hutter – Corporate/M&A
• Michael A. Jaskolski – Intellectual Property
• David B. Kern – Labor & Employment
• Janine M. Landow-Esser – Environment: Mainly Transactional
• Paul L. Langer – Insurance: Dispute Resolution
• Scott L. Langlois – Real Estate
• Anthony C. Marino – Banking & Finance
• Don P. Martin – Litigation: General Commercial
• Adrianne C. Mazura – Labor & Employment
• Thomas P. McElligott – Natural Resources & Environment
• Robert F. Messerly – Real Estate
• Brian K. Moll – Corporate/M&A
• Roger N. Morris – Healthcare
• Ann M. Murphy – Banking & Finance
• David P. Olson – Labor & Employment: Employee Benefits & Compensation
• Michael J. Ostermeyer – Real Estate
• Nancy K. Peterson – Natural Resources & Environment
• Jeffrey S. Piell – Labor & Employment
• Pamela M. Ploor – Labor & Employment
• Joseph E. Puchner – Real Estate
• Stephanie J. Quincy – Labor & Employment
• Robert D. Rothacker – Labor & Employment: Employee Benefits & Compensation
• John A. Rothstein – Litigation: General Commercial
• James A. Ryan – Litigation: General Commercial
• Donald K. Schott – Litigation: General Commercial
• Sean M. Scullen – Labor & Employment
• Walter J. Skipper – Corporate/M&A
• Derek L. Sorenson – Real Estate
• Grant S. Sovern – Labor & Employment: Immigration
• Peter A. Tomasi – Natural Resources & Environment
• Margaret Utterback – Banking & Finance
• Arthur A. Vogel, Jr. – Natural Resources & Environment
• Kim Marie Wynn – Banking & Finance
• Ted Yi – Real Estate
• Michael D. Zeka – Real Estate

ContractRoom has posted a free eBook on Building a Transformative Contract Management Practice that can be downloaded.

Machine learning is a field of computer science that allows computers to recognize patterns and learn from them, the company says on its website. With machine learning algorithms are used to learn from and make predictions on data. Arthur Samuel, a pioneer of the tech industry with a background in electrical engineering, was the first one to label this field of computer science as machine learning and defined it as “Field of study that gives computers the ability to learn without being explicitly programmed” in 1959.

The book discusses how machine learning and Natural Language Processing could be applied to B2B contracting in the future.

Download the free eBook.

By Jose Tabuena, JD, CFE, CHC

Effectiveness is a cornerstone of modern corporate compliance. The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines expect it, and compliance officers spend substantial time and resources trying to create an effective program. And as reflected in recent studies and surveys, assessing compliance program effectiveness continues to be top-of-mind for senior compliance officers. On its face, the regular monitoring and measuring of the program can prove beneficial to company success.

Yet in spite of the Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations being in existence for over 20 years, and the recent focus on developing metrics, it remains challenging to demonstrate the effectiveness of the compliance function.

In recent columns I’ve raised the limitations on government pronouncements and socalled metrics, with the current lack of rigor in measuring effectiveness. Enforcers and regulators (typically lawyers) are not scientists, and the field of compliance can benefit from more empirical research. Surveys of compliance professions reveal that many are not confident that the metrics they use to assess compliance program effectiveness give them a true picture of program success.

Still, a company will want to be able to demonstrate that it is creditworthy under the sentencing guidelines to benefit from penalty reductions, and more importantly to avoid indictment altogether. The company’s other constituents, including shareholders, the board, and management, will also seek some level of assurance that the compliance program is effective and worthy of investments that have been made. Program “efficiency” is another consideration for evaluating performance. Without an agreed-upon methodology, and needing more than a qualitative description of “I know effectiveness when I see it,” how can a company approach this measurement challenge?

Regular reporting and meeting with the board

One way companies can respond to this concern is to compile regular (at least annual) compliance program reports that detail all key aspects of their respective programs at a particular time. The report can be a compilation of quarterly reporting with a summary of highlights for the fiscal year. If sufficiently comprehensive and persuasive, such reports may help a company surmount the evidentiary challenge of proving the effectiveness of its program at a given point of time in the relatively distant past.

Of course this begs the question of what goes into a program report. At a minimum you want to make sure your board is up to speed with your compliance program by summarizing the key changes and developments. The compliance framework essentially boils down to three basic questions which form the basis of an effectiveness evaluation and program audit methodology: 1) Is the compliance program well-designed? 2) Is it being applied in good faith? and 3) Does it work?

The science and mostly art of effectiveness assessments is still evolving. You need to carefully identify types of data available, apply insight to the data, and design metrics to create the story around effectiveness.

Compliance programs, particularly in highly regulated industries, have matured to the point where data for the first two questions are periodically collected and reviewed. This is at least a good start with building the case for effectiveness. To evaluate effectiveness, compliance departments now analyze internal audit findings, track hotline calls, monitor training completion rates, review the disposition of internal investigations, perform self-assessments, survey employees, compare themselves against peer companies, retain outside professionals to review the compliance function, and track performance on regulatory reviews. When meeting with the board you can talk through progress, results, and challenges as they stand today, in relation to previous years, and benchmarked against other companies:

• Implementation Process – Status of important compliance initiatives, any major program operational updates, and what work remains.
• Risk Profile Changes – Any new, emerging risks or noteworthy changes to the likelihood or severity of your organizational profile, either due to business changes or environmental developments.
• Policy Attestation and Training Certification – What percentage of employees have successfully completed training and policy requirements, including the results of any post-training tests and policy attestation rates? Are there consequences for those who have not completed?
• Employee Feedback – Highlights of feedback received through employee focus groups, culture surveys, suggestion box, and how you are using this feedback to drive improvements.
• Compliance Audit Findings – Results of internal or external audits, and what these findings mean for the organization and the compliance program.
• Hotline/Internal Reporting Data – How many tips your hotline or other reporting channels have received, trends by type of incidents being reported, and any hotspots that have emerged in particular locations, departments, or business units.
• Incidents and Investigations – The number and type of investigations that took place, the disposition of cases, and what ongoing investigations the board should be aware of.

Risk focus

A feature of an effective program is the regular performance of a compliance risk assessment. Regulators and enforcement agencies will be looking for correlation between the risk assessment measures and performance indicators that are being used to monitor those risks and compliance performance. These measures should consider the high-risk areas and what has been put in place to address those special risks; internal audit will undertake an annualized range of audits as part to identify compliance issues that provides a good source of measures and also indicate to the regulator that the company is operating cohesively.

The COSO Enterprise Risk Management and Risk Framework identifies the core elements of well-designed KRIs (Key Risk Indicators) to link business objectives to strategies to risk. The KRIs, if robust, should give you visibility into your riskiest areas. Periodic risk assessment results should be used to determine whether compliance risks are increasing or decreasing.

The data and results from a compliance risk assessment provide an opportunity to support program effectiveness. An approach to consider is to incorporate risk ratings that are generated from the risk assessment into routine monitoring reports. The status of mitigation efforts can be tracked and the impact on the risk rating reported as part of regular compliance program updates to senior management and the board. Such reports can be trended to (hopefully) depict the impact of mitigation activities with risk ratings adjusting over time.

Dashboards

Some organizations use dashboards (or scorecards) as a shortcut to giving executives and board members information about what is being accomplished by the compliance program and where the organization is at risk. The challenge is figuring out what metrics will go on the dashboard. Your metrics need to be specific and unique to your company and what business it conducts along with what goals you’re trying to achieve as a whole and as a compliance program—there is no one-size list of these metrics. Best practice and regulatory standards call for risk-based program reviews to specifically account for an organization’s unique risk profile.

Given the lack of standard measurement techniques, how else can dashboard metrics be identified? A rigorous audit to evaluate a compliance program will analyze specific program elements. The auditor can start with tools utilized when conducting a review of the compliance environment under COSO. This includes techniques for evaluating entitylevel controls, the control environment, and fraud-control activities. There are metrics around surveillance and testing but, in the end, do we know if we have an effective program? It’s still difficult to say. For purposes of the sentencing guidelines a company can stand-up a program that ticks all the boxes. One can engage independent consultants to come in and validate the existence and good faith effort being made. From benchmarking we know how our company compares to others. While metrics do not yet fully answer the crucial question of program efficacy, it can help build the case for effectiveness.

The science and mostly art of effectiveness assessments is still evolving. You need to carefully identify types of data available, apply insight to the data, and design metrics to create the story around effectiveness. Ultimately you want to create a report that tells the story of the compliance program to leadership, and if ever needed—to enforcement authorities and industry regulators.

Originally published in Compliance Week

By Keli Johnson Swan
Scott & Scott LLP

Photo by Lending Memo

Sometimes a company receives notices of audits from many publishers or trade associations at the same time. Often this is because multiple agencies have received confidential reports from the same informant. If a current or previous employee contacts both the Software & Information Industry Association (“SIIA”) and BSA|The Software Alliance (“BSA”), the company may face an audit from both of these entities at the same time, or in close proximity to one another.

Once a software audit inquiry is initiated, it can be difficult to convince the auditor to disengage. However, there are a few important tips to cope with an SIIA audit after a BSA audit.

1.Identify the date of the request
Typically, the first entity to request an audit has priority over the second. Therefore, if you receive a BSA audit demand prior to the SIIA audit demand, you may request that the SIIA stand down while you complete the initial audit.

2. Identify the software publishers involved
While the SIIA may be convinced to disengage from auditing any overlapping software publishers, the attorney representing the SIIA may insist on a concurrent audit of any software publishers that are not BSA members.

The initial audit letter from both the BSA and SIIA should identify which software publishers are within the scope of the audit. It is crucial to compare the letters and determine which, if any, publishers overlap and request that these are excluded from the second audit.

3. Get a release of liability from the original audit
The most important provision in a settlement agreement to resolve copyright infringement claims is the release of liability provision. In the event that a company determines that it has a license deficiency for any software products and is required to pay a penalty for alleged copyright infringement, it is critical that the company obtains a release of liability for all deficient software.

This provision will prevent the second auditors from seeking damages for the same software installations. If in doubt, a company should retain counsel experienced in resolving and negotiating software audits.

Takata Corp. has confirmed it has hired investment bank Lazard Ltd. to lead a financial restructuring in an effort to resolve costs stemming from its recall of tens of millions of faulty air bags linked to at least 13 deaths and more than 100 injuries worldwide, Reuters is reporting.

“Takata’s board of directors in February named an outside steering committee to develop a comprehensive restructuring plan to address the financial and operational issues related to its recall of the defective inflators,” swrites David Shepardson. “Takata’s outside committee said it retained Lazard as it is ‘expeditiously seeking new investment for Takata,’ the committee said in a statement.”

Takata posted a net loss of $120 million for the year ended in March and could potentially could face billions of dollars in costs related to the recall.

Read the article.

U.S. District Court Judge Dee Drell  of the Western District of Louisiana recently denied a motion to alter or amend the court’s judgment against CITGO Petroleum Corp. – allowing an $81 million judgment against the oil company to stand, report Jaclyn E. Hickman and Robert B. McNeal on the Energy Law Blog of Liskow & Lewis.

The article reports that the judgment is the latest in a suit the EPA filed against CITGO under the Clean Water Act for a 2006 spill at the oil company’s St. Charles refinery.

“Given that in 2015 all civil enforcement actions by the EPA yielded penalties totaling $205 million (excluding settlements), the CITGO judgment stands out as unusually large,” the authors write. … “The Fifth Circuit’s response to CITGO’s second appeal may provide guidance on whether these types of judgments could be a trend in future Clean Water Act enforcement actions.”

Read the article.

In an article posted on their firm’s website, Matthew T. Furton  and Julie L. Young, partners in Locke Lord, discuss some recent rulings on arbitration by the U.S. Supreme Court, particularly as they apply to insurance and reinsurance.

The questions and answers discuss why the court has taken on more cases involving arbitration, which arbitration cases are currently under consideration by the court, why it matters that the circuits are split as to whether to stay or dismiss an action after compelling arbitration, and what the current state of the “manifest disregard” standard is.

Read the article.

Florida lawyer and lobbyist Alan Koslow was charged Thursday with a federal money-laundering conspiracy after prosecutors said he and a friend laundered what they believed was cash linked to illegal gambling and drug dealing, according to a report in the Sun Sentinel of Fort Lauderdale.

The report says the manner in which Koslow, 62, and Susan Mohr, 57, of Delray Beach, were charged suggests both have already reached plea agreements with prosecutors.

The criminal charges are linked to an undercover FBI sting that began more than three years ago, in which Koslow allegedly accepted $220,000 in cash that he agreed to launder for the undercover FBI agents between December 2012 and August 2013, according to court records. In exchange, he was paid $8,500, investigators wrote.

Read the article.

Google won a jury verdict that ends Oracle’s claim to a $9 billion slice of the search giant’s Android phone business, reports The Washington Post.

“Oracle contended that Google needed a license to use its Java programming language to develop Android, the operating system in 80 percent of the world’s mobile devices,” writes Joel Rosenblatt. “Jurors in a federal court in San Francisco rejected that argument Thursday and concluded that Google made fair use of the code under copyright law.”

Stakes were high for Google. A loss could have given more weight to software copyrights and to spur litigation to protect those added rights. “Oracle — which started the trial at an advantage with the judge explaining that it had already been established that Google had infringed Oracle’s copyrights — plans to appeal, although legal experts said overturning a jury verdict will be difficult,” according to the report.

Read the article.

Videos of Hillary Clinton’s former aides and others giving depositions in a lawsuit related to her private email set-up will be kept secret, at least for now, a federal judge ruled Thursday, according to a report by Politico.

Josh Gerstein wrote that U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan granted a request from former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills that the deposition recordings be kept from the public because of the potential they could be used for partisan purposes or perhaps used in attack ads against Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“The public has a right to know details related to the creation, purpose and use of the clintonemail.com system. Thus, the transcripts of all depositions taken in this case will be publicly available. It is therefore unnecessary to also make the audiovisual recording of Ms. Mills’ deposition public,” the judge wrote.

Read the article.

Practical Law and the Wage & Hour Defense Institute (WHDI) will present a free, 75-minute webinar providing guidance on the U.S. Department of Labor’s final rule, updating the regulations governing white collar exemptions under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

The webinar will be Wednesday, June 1, beginning at 1 p.m. EDT.

The rule, which takes effect Dec. 1, 2016, doubles the minimum weekly salary threshold required for the exempt classification of executive, administrative, professional, and computer professional employees. In addition, the new rule increases the minimum annual compensation and weekly salary requirements for exempt highly compensated employees (HCEs), and the special salary levels for employees in the motion picture industry and employees in American Samoa.

Moderator Paul Bittner of Ice Miller LLP (Columbus, OH), and speakers Susan N. Eisenberg of Cozen O’Connor (Miami) and Francis X. Neuner, Jr. of Spencer Fane (St. Louis), all members of the Wage & Hour Defense Institute, will discuss what employers must do now to ensure compliance with the final rule, including:

Counting bonuses and incentive payments toward satisfying the new minimum salary.

• Reclassifying exempt employees who no longer satisfy the salary threshold.
• Communicating reclassification decisions.
• Planning for scheduled adjustments to the salary threshold.
• Addressing pay increases and the effect on an employee’s exempt status.
• Evaluating the risk of improper classification.
• Understanding what the DOL’s final rule does not change.

A short Q&A session will follow.

Presenters:

• Paul Bittner, Partner, Ice Miller LLP (Columbus, OH)
• Susan N. Eisenberg, Member, Cozen O’Connor (Miami)
• Francis X. (Frank) Neuner, Jr., Partner, Spencer Fane (St. Louis)
• Suzanne K. Brown, Senior Legal Editor, Practical Law Labor & Employment (Moderator)

CLE credit is available for: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington. CLE credit is being sought for: Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia CLE credit can be self-applied for in: Florida

Register for the webinar.

Compliancy Group will present a complimentary webinar designed to give individuals and entities operating in the health care sector the skills they need to be prepared to identify, respond and manage data breaches in a timely, efficient and compliant manner.

The event will be Wednesday, June 15, beginning at 2 p.m.

“Data breaches are becoming more and more common among health care providers, payers and their vendors,” the company says on its website. “Some estimates indicate that one-third of all Americans had their health information breached in 2015 alone, and data breach costs are approaching $250 per affected individual – not including the million dollar penalties with government regulators have recently issued.

This webinar will give listeners the tools they need to develop a data breach plan to protect their organization.

Register for the webinar.

When Beck Redden partner and appellate specialist Connie Pfeiffer led the charge to overturn a Fifth Circuit decision, the path to victory was nearly certain to be long and arduous, the firm said in a release.

The Fifth Circuit had just decided a critical question interpreting the Texas Constitution, holding that homeowners with constitutionally defective liens on their homestead must file suit to set the lien aside within four years of originating a home equity loan.  (See Priester v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 708 F.3d 667, 674 (5th Cir. 2013).  Yet overturning Priester would prove challenging, because out-of-state lenders could usually remove Texas homeowner suits to federal court, where Priester was binding.

The release continues:

Beck Redden was first hired to handle a homeowner’s Fifth Circuit appeal immediately following Priester and to seek the Fifth Circuit’s certification of the Texas constitutional questions, even though the Fifth Circuit rarely certifies a question it has already decided.  The Fifth Circuit adhered to that policy, holding that it could not revisit Priester or seek the Texas Supreme Court’s guidance.  In the wake of Priester, nearly all homeowner suits were removed to federal court and promptly dismissed.

Beck Redden was then hired in one of the few cases remaining in state court.  It stepped in mid-way in an appeal before Houston’s Fourteenth Court of Appeals, but the court fell in step with the growing line of cases following Priester and dismissing homeowner claims as time-barred.

At last in the Texas Supreme Court, Beck Redden handled every aspect of the briefing, argument, and strategy.  Connie Pfeiffer authored the briefs and presented oral argument, working with her appellate partner Russell S. Post and trial lawyers Chip Lane and Anh Thu Dinh of The Lane Law Firm.

The Texas Supreme Court voted 6 to 3 to overturn the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Priester and five Texas appellate decisions reaching the same holdings (See Wood v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. May 20, 2016).   The Majority followed the Constitution’s plain text to hold “that liens securing constitutionally noncompliant home-equity loans are invalid until cured and thus not subject to any statute of limitations.”  The practical effect of the Supreme Court’s decision is that homeowners will not face foreclosure unless their lender has complied with the Texas Constitution to create a valid lien.  The decision upholds the Constitution’s careful protections for homeowners by ensuring that invalid liens do not become valid and enforceable merely with the passage of time.

Foley & Lardner LLP announced that Dana Lach has returned to the firm’s Health Care Finance, Public Finance and Finance & Financial Institutions Practices in the Milwaukee office.

In a release, the firm said Lach has extensive experience counseling health care and other nonprofit organizations, including colleges and universities, in tax-exempt and taxable bond transactions, commercial loans, non-traditional financing products such as commercial paper programs and securitizations, and derivative transactions. Lach regularly serves as counsel to investment banks, purchasers and commercial banks in connection with tax-exempt and taxable financing transactions. Lach’s participation as borrower’s or underwriter’s counsel on more than 150 securities transactions has totaled in excess of $20 billion.

“Dana’s deep experience structuring complex securities transactions across many public sectors, particularly the health care industry, will play a key role as we work to sustain and grow our established public finance bench,” said Laura Bilas, chair of Foley’s Public Finance Practice.

Lach has worked on post-issuance compliance, including ongoing tax, covenant and disclosure compliance. She has helped develop policies and procedures for both tax and primary and secondary market disclosure requirements and has provided guidance on remedial actions for changes in use of bond financed facilities and information reporting for the U.S. Internal Revenue Service Form 990, Schedule K.

“We are thrilled to welcome Dana back to Foley. Her immense knowledge in the health care, nonprofit and municipal financing arenas will contribute vastly to our existing and expanding client base,” said Linda Benfield, managing partner of Foley’s Milwaukee office.

Photo by Gage Skidmore

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system while she was secretary of state violated State Department rules, the agency’s Inspector General concluded, according to a report published by Bloomberg.

“The audit by the State Department’s independent investigator found no evidence that she requested guidance or approval to conduct official business via personal e-mail on a private server — and concluded the agency likely wouldn’t have granted the request,” wrote Billy House and Laura Litvan. “The Inspector General also faulted the State Department’s handling of electronic records and communications beyond Clinton’s tenure.”

In its conclusion, the Office of the Inspector General wrote: “Longstanding, systemic weaknesses related to electronic records and communications have existed within the Office of the Secretary that go well beyond the tenure of any one Secretary of State.”

Read the article.

Photo by Kārlis Dambrāns

Huawei Technologies sued Samsung Electronics on claims of infringement of smartphone patents, the Chinese firm’s first intellectual property challenge against the world’s top mobile maker, reports Reuters.

“Huawei has filed lawsuits in the United States and China seeking compensation for what it said was unlicensed use of fourth-generation (4G) cellular communications technology, operating systems and user interface software in Samsung phones,” according to the report.”

“The lawsuit marks a reversal of roles in China where firms have often been on the receiving end of patent infringement disputes. In smartphones, makers have grown rapidly in recent years but different intellectual property laws outside of China have slowed overseas expansion,” writes Yimou Lee and Anne Marie Roantree.

Read the article.

The Associated Press is reporting that Volkswagen and attorneys for vehicle owners affected by the company’s emissions cheating scandal are on target to meet a June deadline for a final settlement proposal, a federal judge said Tuesday.

A federal judge in San Francisco said the parties have made substantial progress in reaching a deal for that could affect more than 480,000 owners of polluting Volkswagens in the U.S.

“Many questions remain unanswered, including how much money owners can expect in a buyback and how much additional compensation beyond repairs and buybacks they’ll receive,” according to the report.

Read the article.

Live Summit:
Thursday, June 9,
New York, NY

Registration is being accepted for Bloomberg Law’s premier legal event, the annual Big Law Business Summit in New York City, scheduled for Thursday, June 9.

The event will be at the Apella, Event Space at Alexandria Center, 450 E 29th Street in New York, NY 10016, beginning with breakfast and registration at 8:15 a.m. EDT and ending with a closing keynote and then a party at 5:50 p.m.

General Counsel News readers may attend at no charge. (Registration form)

Two of the speakers will be :

• Magistrate Judge James Orenstein, U.S. District Court (E.D.N.Y.), who recently entered the debate around the government’s ability to compel unlocking of cell phones. Bloomberg News reports, “Orenstein is the first judge to thoroughly explore what the government can and cannot access.”
• Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr., who will speak on collaborating across borders and sectors to detect and prevent cybercrimes. He recently testified before the House Judiciary Committee on default device encryption and the need for a federal legislative solution.

Register for the summit.