Government Enjoined from Implementing Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces
Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.25.16
On October 24, a U.S. district court issued a preliminary injunction enjoining implementation of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces final rule, which had been scheduled to take effect today, October 25 (discussed here and here). The court held that the executive order, implementing regulations, and DOL guidance violated the First Amendment, contractors’ due process rights, and the Federal Arbitration Act and enjoined the government from (a) implementing any portion of the FAR rule or the DOL Guidance relating to the new reporting and disclosure requirements and (b) enforcing the new restriction on arbitration agreements, while permitting “paycheck transparency” requirements to proceed.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.15.26
Who Invented That? When AI Writes the Code, Patent Validity Issues May Follow
In Fortress Iron, LP v. Digger Specialties, Inc., No. 24-2313 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 2, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed what happens when a patent incorrectly lists the true inventors, and that error cannot be corrected under 35 U.S.C. § 256(b), which requires notice and a hearing for all “parties concerned.” In Fortress, the patent owner sought judicial correction to add an inventor under § 256(b), but that inventor could not be located. Because the missing inventor qualified as a “concerned” party under the statute, the lack of notice and a hearing for that inventor made correction under § 256(b) impossible, and the patents could not be saved from invalidity.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.14.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.14.26
FedRAMP Solicits Public Comment on Overhaul to Incident Communications Procedures
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.14.26
