“While organizations make significant investments in protecting their data from outside infiltration, they can often overlook the serious threats that exist within their own workforce. According to a 2020 study released by the Ponemon Institute, the biggest threat in terms of disclosure of sensitive information comes from so-called “insider threats,” in the form of employees who disclose protected information or provide a means of access to that information to third parties, either unwittingly or otherwise. That threat has only grown in recent years, increasing by 47% in the last two years alone,” reports Risa B. Boerner in Fisher Phillips Newsletters.

She further breaks down her article into the following sections:

• The Costs Can Be Staggering
• Why The Recent Surge?
• First Steps: Awareness + Training
• Advanced Tactics

Read the article.

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP will present a free webinar, “Linking an Invention to the Evidence: Strategic Considerations from Prosecution to Litigation,” featuring Fitch Even attorneys Mark A. Borsos and Evan Kline-Wedeen.

The webinar will take place on Thursday, April 23, 2020, at 9:00 am PDT / 10:00 am MDT / 11:00 am CDT / 12 noon EDT.

Evidence that others value an invention can be used by a patent owner for many purposes, including demonstrating that the invention was not obvious, or that infringement has damaged and will continue to damage the patent owner. Yet that evidence may be of little value without the ability to tie it to the specific inventions set forth in the claims of a patent. When there are numerous reasons that customers might purchase or desire a product sold by a patent owner or infringer, establishing a nexus between the claims of the patent and real-world evidence becomes complicated.

During this webinar, our presenters will discuss the following:
• Establishing a nexus between evidence of commercial success of real-world products and the patented invention
• Demonstrating a connection between patented features and lost profits
• Proving there is a causal nexus between irreparable harm and the patented invention that justifies an injunction
• Drafting claims with forethought to future evidentiary requirements

CLE credit has been approved for California and Illinois and is pending in Nebraska. Other states may also award CLE credit upon attendee request.

Following the live event, a recording of the webinar will be available to view for one year at www.fitcheven.com.

Register for the webinar.

“What makes an expert witness persuasive to a jury? Is it their background and training? The work that they did on the case? Their communication skills in teaching the jury?” asks Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm in the Persuasive Litigator.

“The research suggests that expert influence depends on a variety of factors, and a scale even exists to measure these factors: the Expert Persuasion Expectancy (ExPEx) framework. That framework includes many of the variables that experts and the attorneys who sponsor them would expect: Foundation, Field, Specialty, Ability, Opinion, Support, Consistency, and Trustworthiness. Even as the items are potentially unsurprising, it is still helpful to keep the whole list in mind.”

“Recent research  shows that these factors matter, and also suggests that there may be a ‘Big 3’ in this list.”

Read the article.

Eversheds Sutherland is pleased to announce that the TCPA litigation and counseling subgroup of the firm’s Litigation Practice Group has published its 6th annual REDIAL: 2019 TCPA Year-in-Review – Analysis of Critical Issues and Trends in TCPA Compliance and Litigation. REDIAL reflects the team’s thought leadership and in-depth analysis of significant Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) court cases, regulatory developments and compliance issues.

“In 2019, the insurance, financial services, energy and telecommunications sectors, among many others, were all uniquely affected by the TCPA,” said Lewis S. Wiener, US partner and leader of Eversheds Sutherland’s TCPA practice. “Keeping up with developments in the TCPA area has never been more important. At the start of 2019, there was no more TCPA plaintiff-friendly jurisdiction than the 11th Circuit. By the end of the year, the 11th Circuit had become the least plaintiff-friendly jurisdiction. As TCPA cases continue to be filed at a record rate, compliance becomes more important for businesses in every sector. REDIAL and Eversheds Sutherland’s continuing thought leadership in the TCPA area helps to highlight these developing trends and analyzes the key legal issues affecting these industries.”

Among other things, a few interesting facts within the publication include:

• The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association estimates that 6 billion texts are sent daily in the United States
• As many as 100,000 cell phone numbers are reassigned every day
• More than 3,000 TCPA lawsuits were filed in 2019

View the full 2019 TCPA Year-in-Review publication.

Eversheds Sutherland’s Litigation Practice Group, which includes more than 100 litigators, has tried and argued cases in the US Supreme Court, all 13 circuits of the US Court of Appeals, the Court of Federal Claims, the Tax Court, and hundreds of federal district and state trial and appellate courts across the country. The team represents regional, national and global clients from a broad range of industries, including financial services, securities, insurance, energy, construction, manufacturing, automotive, distribution, education, professional services, data privacy, electronics, technology and defense. The experienced team of TCPA and class action attorneys aggressively defends clients and counsels on how to set up and structure communication programs to comply with the TCPA and minimize litigation risks.

“The president of Texas Southern University may be out of a job after TSU regents alleged that he failed to promptly report information about an admissions scandal at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law.” reports Debra Cassens Weiss in the ABA Journal.

“The regents said in a Feb. 4 termination notice that Lane failed to promptly report to the board or internal auditor allegations of fraudulent and dishonest conduct by an assistant law dean.”

“The assistant law dean was accused of taking a $14,000 payoff for facilitating a scholarship and fraudulent admission for a law student. The assistant law dean was also accused of facilitating a fraudulent transfer application for a second student.”

Read the article.

“Legal technologies promise to flourish in the coming decade, and although it is not possible to predict all the innovations that are likely to become mainstream, the use of smart contracts appears to be on the rise. A typical smart contract uses computers and code to automate performance of some or all of the parties’ obligations. However, the legal terms of the contract are likely to remain in written form in a contract that people can read. If a dispute arises, the parties may prefer arbitration as an alternative to court, but arbitration doesn’t happen on its own – it typically requires a properly drafted arbitration clause.”

Steven K. Davidson, Michael J. Baratz, Jared R. Butcher and Molly Bruder Fox provide some tips in Steptoe’s News/Publications to keep in mind when considering how to draft these clauses.

Read the article.

“It is important for contractual language to be not only precise but also accurate. Many agreements govern multiple individuals, some of whose gender is unclear or variable. This article will give you advice and guidance on how to adjust contract language to be gender-neutral. As society moves towards treating all genders equally, legal contracts should too.” advises Kati I. Pajak in Mintz’s Insights Center.

“Conversations around gender and gender neutrality are becoming more and more mainstream. Thompson Reuters reported that in the past year (2018), there has been an increase in the number of clients requesting gender-neutral documents. Start-ups are at the forefront of change and industry disruption, so it is logical that they stay ahead of the trend.”

“Now, the shift towards non-gendered pronouns and away from binary choices of “he” or “she” means attorneys need to adopt new drafting techniques. As entrepreneurs and leaders of your own business, you can encourage this shift.”

Read the article.

“When business deals are concluded verbally or with a gentleman’s agreement solely, the results can later on be very detrimental. Oral agreements are inadmissible in the court of law and if you happen to be ripped off by a business associate, the chances are slim to win that case. Therefore, drafting a business agreement and documenting it is very important to secure the deal that you will be conducting.” advises Margaret Francis in the Southeast Missourian’s Career Advice.

“To clearly state each party’s rights and obligations, you need to draft an agreement that will be agreed upon by all stakeholders. However, drafting a business deal contract agreement can be tricky, especially if you don’t have a lawyer on your side.”

Read the top 5 tips for a fair business contract agreement.

“Let’s assume the mediator sticks his head into your room with a grin at 8pm after an exhaustive day when your client is still upset he made the 8^th counteroffer and the Mediator says: “Great news! Counter-offer accepted! We have a deal!” Wonderful, right? Even though your client was pushed way past what he came ready to do that day, you have a deal. So what mistakes are made when it comes to confirming the long sought, hard fought deal?” asks David K. Taylor in Buildsmart Mediation.

“This post is a continuation of the 10 most horrible, terrible, no good, “bang your head against the door” mistakes that I have seen lawyers make before, during and after mediations in which I was the mediator. As stated in previous posts, it takes more than throwing together a mediation statement at the last second and showing up at the mediation. Doing it right requires the same kind of due diligence and work that goes into preparing for a key deposition or even trial. Great “mediation” lawyering is essential and is the best way to get to an acceptable deal.”

Read the Top 10 mistakes made in mediations.

“Before the calendar slips too far into the new year, I want to share five important emerging trends or steps for law firm leaders to consider in 2020, each of which will have significant short and long-term implications for your firm.  This little list is not about the macro level industry trends based on historical data with which we all generally agree.  Rather, these are quickly developing micro-trends that are not on many radar screens yet…but need to be,” provides Michael Short in LawVision’s INSIGHTS.

“For your changes to have an impact this year, you need to get your initiatives moving in Q1 and fully implemented before the end of Q2.”

Read the article.

“The beginning of a new year is the perfect time for busy lawyers to take stock of last year’s achievements and to establish plans for being SMART about business development in the coming months. To maximize your business development time, my question to you is: are you being SMART about it? SMART is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time Sensitive. A key benefit to the SMART framework is that you are concentrating time on the most essential areas of your business development activities. SMART provides you with focus, so you can actually achieve your goals.” advises Jason Levin in the Above the Law Career Center.

He briefly goes through the SMART framework.

Read the article.

“Teenagers aren’t being imaginative enough with their ambitions as they aspire to a short list of 20th-century occupations in their future careers, according to the OECD.” reports Carolynn Look in Bloomberg.

“Huge changes in the world of work — driven by developments in technology and social media — are having too little impact on the job expectations of young people, according to a report presented at the World Economic Forum in Davos by the Paris-based organization.”

“The report cited a survey of 15-year-olds showing that career ambitions narrowed in the last two decades. Roughly half of boys and girls from 41 countries said they expect to work in one of just 10 jobs by the age of 30. Such roles originate overwhelmingly from the 19th and 20th centuries, such as doctors, teachers, veterinarians, business managers, engineers, police officers, and lawyers.”

Read the Bloomberg article.

The Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics will host Academies in 18 locations worldwide to help Deepen Your Compliance Expertise in 2020.

Learn to effectively manage a compliance and ethics program and mitigate risk at your organization at one of SCCE’s Basic Compliance & Ethics Academies. They are ideal for professionals who want to raise their knowledge level and help improve the effectiveness of their organization’s program.

While at the Academy, you can also take an optional Compliance Certification Board (CCB)®  exam. They offer the Certified Compliance & Ethics Professional (CCEP)® exam at US Academies and the Certified Compliance & Ethics Professional — International (CCEP-I)® exam outside of the US. Learn more about certification and the exam at SCCE to see if you meet the criteria and have the practical work experience it takes to become certified.

Register for the event or get details.

A teach-out plan for Thomas Jefferson School of Law, allowing limited accreditation until the end of the spring 2023 term, has been approved by the council of the ABA’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, according to a report in the ABA Journal.

Under the plan for the San Diego school, ABA accreditation will cover current law students and transient students. The council retains its authority to remove ABA accreditation before the spring 2023 term ends if the school fails to meet obligations.

The school was put on probation in 2017, and the council withdrew its ABA approval last summer.

Read the  ABA Journal article.

Photo by John Phelan

As Trump reshapes the federal judiciary with staunch conservatives and controversial picks, some Harvard Law School students appear to be thinking twice about applying for clerk jobs with them, and passing up what are generally considered plum positions, reports The Boston Globe.

Some Harvard law students are reluctant to clerk for some recent appointees who have been outspoken opponents of gay rights, antiabortion stalwarts, and who have been deemed “not qualified” by the American Bar Association, said one third-year student.

“But some legal scholars worry that the reluctance of students at one of the nation’s premier law schools to clerk for Trump-appointed judges, first reported by Bloomberg Law, could further polarize the legal profession and do the country more harm than good,” writes the Globe‘s Deirdre Fernandes.

Read the Boston Globe article.

The Supreme Court will hear a slate of highly charged disputes when the justices return to the bench in the new year and resume one of the most politically volatile terms in recent memory, reports The Hill.

The court already has heard high-profile fights over LGBT rights in the workplace, the scope of the Second Amendment and the deportation status of nearly 700,000 young undocumented immigrants. But the remaining cases on the court’s docket are no less explosive, write The Hill‘s John Kruzel and Harper Neidig.

The top seven cases to be heard this session involve a separation of powers fight over President Trump’s financial records, Louisiana’s abortion law, religious school scholarships, religious exemptions from discrimination suits, the future of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a fight over how copyright law treats software interfaces, and Bridgegate and public corruption.

Read the Hill article.

Bloomberg Law tells the story of a nonprofit consumer advocacy and education group, Law School Transparency, that has become a key part of a shift in how consumers weigh the benefits versus the substantial costs of law school.

One of the early findings of the 10-year-old nonprofit was that high starting salary salaries often listed for law school graduates were based on a low number of alumni responses.

A  more-effort led to a revision of accreditation standards to require 75 percent of each school’s graduates to pass the bar exam within two years of graduation, in order to ensure schools only admit students equipped for practicing law.

Read the Bloomberg article.

The University of Phoenix — a for-profit college chain that has been under scrutiny for years — has reached a landmark settlement agreement with the Federal Trade Commission following accusations of unfair and deceptive practices that will result in widespread student loan forgiveness, Forbes reports.

“Too often, students would graduate from the University of Phoenix with dismal career prospects, minimal ongoing support, and a lot of student loan debt that could be impossible to repay,” writes Adams S. Minsky, a Forbes contributor. “The University allegedly specifically targeted people of color and military veterans.”

Under the settlement, the university will pay $191 million, of which $141 million will be used to forgive some student loans for certain borrowers who attended the university.

Read the Forbes article.

The mean scaled score for the July 2019 multistate bar exam increased this year, according to the National Conference of Bar Examiners and reported in the ABA Journal.

“But for a small number of schools found to be out of compliance with an ABA accreditation admissions standard, some have concerns that even with bar pass rate improvements, they still may not meet a new standard that requires pass rates of at least 75% for graduates who took a bar exam in the past two years,” writes the Journal‘s Stephanie Francis Ward.

Read the ABA Journal article.

The Princeton Review has released the results of a study designed to rank the top 10 U.S. law schools that provide the best opportunities for women students.

The findings are based on school reported data — the percent of the student body that are women — and student surveys. Students answered a survey question on whether all students are afforded equal treatment by students and faculty regardless of their gender.

Topping the list is Stanford University School of Law in California.

Read the Princeton Review article.