Kat Delos Reyes

New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell LLP said on May 9 that it has formed a new artificial intelligence practice, as large firms compete to handle clients' growing AI-related legal needs. The 800-lawyer firm said the group would be headed by leaders of its intellectual property and finance practices in Silicon Valley, New York and London. Several other large U.S. law firms have also established dedicated AI practice groups over the past year and a half, hoping to capitalize on a surge in AI-related dealmaking, regulatory, and litigation work. Formalizing a practice group can help firms market and expand the work in buzzy, lucrative areas like AI. Find out more: https://reut.rs/44AAG9A 

89

4 Comments

🚨 Attention Legal Professionals! Join us for an enlightening (and free!) CLE, "AI Unveiled: Safeguarding Privacy in the Legal Landscape," on May 23, 2024. 🕐 Time: 1PM EST / 12PM CDT / 11AM MDT / 10AM PDT In this rapidly evolving legal landscape, the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) presents both opportunities and challenges, particularly in protecting personal data and privacy. This 60-minute CLE, led by TikTok’s own Lead Regulatory Privacy Counsel, Gordon Wade, promises invaluable insights into navigating the delicate balance between leveraging AI's capabilities and ensuring robust privacy safeguards. 🔍 What You'll Learn: - Understanding AI's impact on data privacy - Navigating privacy regulations in the legal landscape        - Ethical considerations and best practices for AI deployment Whether you're a seasoned legal practitioner, a technology enthusiast, or a privacy advocate, "AI Unveiled" will equip you with the knowledge and strategies necessary to navigate the complex intersection of AI and privacy within the legal landscape. 🎤 About the Presenter: Gordon Wade CIPP/E, CIPM, FIP is Lead Regulatory Privacy Counsel for MENA, APAC, and SEA at TikTok. With extensive experience and expertise in privacy and data protection, Gordon has published dozens of articles and teaches EU Data Protection Law at Chartered Accountant's Ireland. Don't miss this opportunity to stay ahead in an increasingly AI-driven world. Register now and join us on May 23, 2024! 🔗 https://lnkd.in/gXR23aua #AxiomLaw #ContinuingLegalEducation #AIandPrivacy #LegalLandscape #CLE #AIPolicies #EUAIAct #LegalEducation #InHouseCounsel #GeneralCounsel

18

Boston partner Melissa Nott Davis was recently quoted in the Law360 article, “Better, Faster, Stranger: What Attys Think of Our AI Future.” The article examines artificial intelligence (AI) and how it has and will impact the world on a professional level. More specifically, what the legal profession can expect to come from AI and tools that utilize it such as ChatGPT. With more and more attorneys adopting AI into their everyday practices, it is just a matter of time before the business of law will be forced to adapt to the new technology landscape to some degree. However, Davis is not fully confident in AI abilities at this stage. "I am a little skittish about it," Davis said. "I'd worry about whether it's getting the case law right. I am not ready to let it draft anything." Davis is an experienced litigator who focuses her practice at Nelson Mullins on a wide variety of health, science, and technology sectors, including agribusiness, consumer products, life sciences, pharmaceutical and medical devices.

30

2 Comments

Frier Levitt partner Lucas Morgan has been featured in a New York Law Journal piece titled, “Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator’s Curbs on PBM Industry” by Brian Lee. The article focuses on new regulations from New York’s financial industry, aimed at creating a fairer environment for independent pharmacies by implementing market conduct rules for Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs). Drawing on his experience assisting clients throughout the DFS’s notice and comment rulemaking process and information requests from the New York Pharmacy Benefits Bureau, Lucas offers valuable insights. Read the article here: https://lnkd.in/dkx6qjri #FrierLevitt #NewYork #PBMs #DFS

7

On June 27, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a Maryland district court judgment that confirmed arbitral awards issued in favor of Seiden Law’s client, the Estate of Ke Zhengguang. The case has been discussed on Law360 and Bloomberg Law; articles on the case can be found in the link after the jump. The underlying arbitration concerned a complex dispute related to real property in mainland China, which culminated in an arbitration before the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC).   Between 2018 and 2020, the HKIAC issued a series of awards.  The Estate filed a petition to confirm the awards in a Maryland district court against one of the arbitral respondents, Stephany Yu, who lives in Maryland.  In January 2023, the district court confirmed the awards and issued a $4 million judgment in favor of the Estate. The Fourth Circuit’s unanimous twenty-three-page decision addresses important questions related to the enforcement of international arbitral awards in the United States, including the availability of a forum non conveniens defense under the New York Convention, and whether arbitral awards that are denominated in a foreign currency can be converted into US dollar judgments.  The Fourth Circuit held that a forum non conveniens defense was inapplicable under the facts of this case, even if such a defense is available under the Convention. The Fourth Circuit also held that it was reasonable for the district court to enter judgment in US dollars, notwithstanding that the arbitral panel’s merits award was denominated in Chinese Renminbi (RMB). Seiden Law partner and litigation chair Amiad Kushner argued the appeal. Senior counsel Jennifer Blecher and Senior Associate Xintong Zhang were on the brief. Paralegal Lily Dempsey provided invaluable assistance. https://lnkd.in/eb_SiWh2 https://lnkd.in/eFD4zniu

18

Our new General Counsel, Aryeh Richmond, is diving right in. In an interview with Law360 this week, he details why we've joined forces. Our favorite quotes from that interview: "For me, this is a rare opportunity to have an impact on the legal landscape." "Patlytics is about efficiencies, but also about gathering data from a broader, more complete, better-filtered universe of information. It has the potential to revolutionize patent portfolio management." "Patlytics will also help companies anticipate litigation risks better. They'll better understand patent validity and the possibility of [intellectual property rights] or validity challenges." https://lnkd.in/eMtV3v3w Let's go. 🚀

11

Last year saw an increase in lawsuits targeting website Tracking Technologies as a result of a broad interpretation of privacy laws, particularly the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA). NGE Intellectual Property attorneys and Cybersecurity & Data Privacy team members Kate Campbell, Alfred Tam, David A. Wheeler, AIGP, and Josh Hanson highlight how these lawsuits often claim that using tracking tools such as pixel tags and session replay software constitutes unauthorized wiretapping or using a pen register under CIPA. The article also highlights that recent decisions have been inconsistent, with some courts broadening the scope of CIPA while others have pushed back, thus creating uncertainty for companies facing potential claims. Read the full alert here: https://lnkd.in/gAKVdmqE #TrackingTechnologies #CIPA

8

In an active summer on the privacy front, Peter Hegel (CIPP/US), Rohan Keith Andresen, and Francys Guevara share a few recent updates. https://bit.ly/3S3H04r ◾ Cancellation of American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) House Markup ◾ Rhode Island Data Privacy Law Diverges from the Pack ◾ California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) Announces Cooperation with the French Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL) #Privacy #PrivacyLaw #PrivacyLaws #CPPA #AmericanPrivacyRightsAct

6

Exciting times for #Pennsylvania and #Philadelphia! PA is joining the ranks of AI innovators in the legal field. AI is changing how we practice law, making our work faster and more efficient. Here’s a quick rundown of what AI can do and how PA lawyers can get the right education: What AI Can Do for Lawyers: - Document Review: AI can quickly review and analyze large sets of documents. - Legal Research: AI tools can find case laws and precedents much faster. - Predictive Analytics: AI can predict case outcomes based on past data. - Routine Tasks Automation: AI can handle tasks like scheduling and billing. - Client Service: AI chatbots can answer initial client queries. How to Get Educated on AI: - CLE Programs: Many organizations offer AI-focused Continuing Legal Education. BlueStar has a great CLE coming up on "AI: Friend or Foe? Identifying and Defending Against Manipulated Media in eDiscovery." (This session explores the challenges and opportunities AI-generated images and videos present in legal proceedings. We'll discuss methods for identifying potential manipulation and strategies for ensuring the defensibility of your evidence.) - Online Courses: Websites like Coursera and edX have great AI courses. - Law School Programs: Some schools now offer courses on AI and law. - Professional Organizations: Join groups like IAAIL and attend legal tech conferences. - Workshops: Tech companies and startups often host AI workshops. Applying PA Rules of Professional Conduct with AI: - Rule 1.1 (Competence): Understand AI’s output and educate clients. - Rule 1.4 (Communication): Inform clients about AI’s benefits and risks. - Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality): Protect client info using AI. - Rule 3.1 (Meritorious Claims): Ensure AI arguments are based on fact & law. - Rule 3.3 (Candor): Avoid and correct false AI-generated info. - Rules 5.1 & 5.3 (Supervision): Use AI ethically and responsibly. - Rule 5.5 (Unauthorized Practice): AI shouldn’t replace human legal judgment. 🧠 PRO TIP: VERIFY, VERIFY and VERIFY AGAIN! 🧠 -Rule 8.4 (Misconduct): Avoid dishonest or fraudulent AI use. Let’s embrace AI and keep learning to stay ahead in the legal field. Special thanks to Doug Austin, Robert Ambrogi, and Frank Ramos, who all posted about this. #legaltech #AI #techinnovation #legaleducation #futureoflaw #artificialintelligence Brent Gustafson Donna M. Sarah Thompson, CEDS Deidra Sarego Stephanie Goutos Tim Morenc CEDS Lisa (Mayo) Haynes, what do you think about this? You are smarter than a PA attorney and an AI expert.

9

3 Comments

⚖️ Greenberg Traurig has launched a new legal blog focused on the intricacies of Chapter 93A, the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act. The firm’s Massachusetts Chapter 93A Insights explores Chapter 93A, discussing the legal landscape of consumer rights and business responsibilities, and provides valuable insights and information to help understand and navigate this area of law and its impact on businesses. The blog will be edited by Litigation Shareholder David Thomas and Litigation Associate Angela Bunnell. 💻 Read more in our press release: https://buff.ly/3TkhZD1. #GTNews #GTBlogs #MassachusettsLaw #ConsumerProtection #GTBoston

15

Please join the New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) PTAB Committee on December 17th for a discussion regarding Local Rule 36: Federal Circuit Review Under Scrutiny at the Supreme Court. Chief Judge Markey at the founding of the Federal Circuit made a promise to the bar: "In our Court there will be an opinion explaining enough to tell you what the law is in every case. ***We do not just render a one-worded decision and go away." Yet, for at least the past decade, over 35% of all appeals and over 45% of appeals from the USPTO are decided by the Federal Circuit under its Local Rule 36 with a single word "affirmed", and no explanation of the basis or rationale therefor. Both Local Rule 36 and its implementation by the Federal Circuit are out-of-step with the other circuit courts, as well as their own review process of district court and PTAB decisions. A pair of petitions for certiorari are pending before the Supreme Court to take on the issue Island and ParkerVision, which are seeking SCOTUS review in this practice. ParkerVision and Island together provide an ideal vehicle for this Court to evaluate the issue of summary affirmances by Court of Appeals generally, and the Federal Circuit's Local Rule 36 in particular, both in the context of the general appeal statute of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (Island), as well as with respect of the specific appellate statue for appeals from the USPTO to the Federal Circuit under 35 U.S.C § 144 (ParkerVision). Learn more about Local Rule 36 practice, the objections raised in Island and ParkerVision. Speakers: Island's team, Charley Macedo, David Goldberg and John Dellaportas will be speaking with team members Thomas Hart and Jamie Zipper. Counsel for ParkerVision's team, Amit Vora and Ron Daignault will be speaking. Amicus counsel Robert Rando and Charles E Miller will also be joining the discussion. Co-Chair Ken Adamo and Board Liaison David Bomzer will be present to host and facilitate discussion. There will be a Q&A session afterward. This event is free to all NYIPLA members and PTAB Committee members. 1.0 NY/NJ CLE credit will be available for attendees. To register, click here: https://lnkd.in/ewfTbcju #NYIPLA #PTAB #USPTO

9

Morrison Mahoney Partner Christopher Monson recently prevailed before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which overturned a Superior Court ruling and enforced an arbitration agreement contained in an online contract. The case has far-reaching implications beyond the rideshare context at issue and will be considered a leading precedent when courts in other jurisdictions review similar disputes. Plaintiff contended that the online contract in question was unenforceable because the plaintiff was not required to view the terms and conditions before agreeing to them. According to the plaintiff, to be enforceable, a digital contract must display the full terms and conditions on the user’s device and require the user to scroll through those terms and conditions before agreeing to them. Relying on well-established caselaw regarding contract formation before the digital age, as well as modern caselaw promoting the continued utility of these principles, Chris argued that the user need only be provided a reasonable opportunity to review the terms before manifesting their assent and that a prominently displayed hyperlink directing the user to those terms and conditions is sufficient to provide this opportunity. The SJC agreed, reinforcing the position that the user’s decision not to review the terms of a contract before agreeing to them does not invalidate the agreement. Associate Chanchal Agrawal contributed to the success of this case with the needed research and writing of the brief. Great work, Chris and Chanchal! Read more here:

161

10 Comments

Yesterday, the American Bar Association (ABA) took a significant step forward in addressing the role of artificial intelligence in the legal profession. On July 29, 2024, the ABA released Formal Opinion 512, providing thoughtful and comprehensive ethics guidance on the use of “Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools” in legal practice. This important opinion represents a pivotal moment in the U.S. legal landscape, signaling a growing recognition of generative AI as a valuable and beneficial technology for the practice of law. A Shift in Perspective The ABA’s new guidance marks an important shift in how the legal profession views generative AI. While not explicitly mandating its use, the opinion certainly suggests that understanding and potentially utilizing generative AI tools is becoming increasingly important for competent legal practice. This perspective aligns with the evolving nature of legal technology competence, drawing parallels to how use of email, computerized legal research, and eDiscovery have become standard skills in the lawyer’s arsenal of tool use. Recognizing the Benefits Formal Opinion 512 acknowledges the potential of generative AI to enhance both the efficiency and quality of legal services. By highlighting these benefits, the ABA is effectively encouraging lawyers to explore and consider how these tools might improve their practice and better serve their clients. This recognition is a clear indication that the legal profession is moving towards embracing innovative technologies rather than viewing them primarily with skepticism. Balancing Innovation and Ethics While the opinion is forward-thinking in its approach to generative AI, it appropriately emphasizes the importance of responsible use. The guidance carefully outlines how existing ethical rules apply to this new technology, ensuring that the core values of the legal profession are maintained even as new tools are adopted. This balanced approach demonstrates the ABA’s commitment to fostering innovation while upholding the highest standards of professional conduct. I outline some of the specific ethical considerations, and put this in a broader context, in my blog post on this new Opinion, here: https://lnkd.in/g8GWaFKK

154

27 Comments

Browse our collection of key primary law resources, convenient desktop code sets, and industry-specific resources for legal professionals in California. Explore here: https://bit.ly/3JrhKjW #LexisNexis #LawBooks #CaliforniaLaw #LegalResearch

4

🚨 New Legal Ethics Opinion on Generative AI in Law Practice 🚨 The Pennsylvania Bar Association and the Philadelphia Bar Association have issued Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, addressing the ethical implications of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in legal practice. Here are key takeaways: 1. Competence & Accuracy: Lawyers must ensure AI-generated content is truthful, accurate, and based on sound legal reasoning. All citations must be verified. 2. Client Confidentiality: When using AI systems, safeguard all client information and ensure they adhere to strict confidentiality measures. 3. Transparency with Clients: Clearly communicate the use of AI technologies to clients, explaining their potential impact on case outcomes and obtaining informed consent when necessary. 4. Bias & Hallucinations: Be aware of AI biases and the phenomenon of "hallucinations" (false answers). Always validate AI outputs to prevent misinformation. 5. Judicial and Disciplinary Responses: Courts are increasingly implementing rules for AI use, and disciplinary actions have been taken against attorneys for improper AI use. Read the full opinion here👉 https://lnkd.in/gAuaR9h2 #LegalEthics #ArtificialIntelligence #LegalTech #PersonalInjuryLaw #WorkersCompLaw #AIInLaw

1

🚨 New HIPAA Compliance Rules for Reproductive Health Privacy 🚨 #HaynesBoone’s Jennifer Staton Kreick and Thomas D. Tanabe share insights with the American Health Law Association on the new HIPAA Privacy Rule updates, set to take effect Dec. 23. These changes redefine reproductive health privacy protections, presenting unique compliance challenges for covered entities. Read more about what these updates mean and how to prepare at the link in the comments.

22

1 Comment