On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a trademark dispute between RiseandShine Corporation, doing business as Rise Brewing, and PepsiCo, Inc. over Pepsi’s “Mtn Dew Rise Energy” drink. The Court granted cert on whether judges or juries should evaluate a trademark’s inherent (or conceptual) strength when assessing
Recent Class Actions Expose Data Privacy Risk in Acquisitions in Healthcare and Healthcare AI
By Kim Ly on
The personally identifiable and health information of consumers that a company collects can be a serious consideration behind why another company would acquire it, especially given the use of data to train AI health models. This begs the question of what responsibility the acquiring and acquired companies have to protect…
Citation Not Found: Courts Confront AI Hallucinations
Generative artificial intelligence tools have quickly become part of everyday legal practice. Lawyers are using these tools to draft briefs, summarize cases, and streamline research. But as recent cases make clear, those efficiencies come with a serious risk: sometimes, AI simply makes things up.
Courts across the country are now…
Indiana Federal Court Finds You Cannot Rely on AI As a Replacement for Good Lawyering
By Ashley Weringa on
On April 14, 2026, United States Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana (the “Court”) entered an order in connection with certain unresolved discovery disputes in White v. Walmart, Case No. 25-cv-01120, finding Plaintiff’s counsel’s “exclusive reliance” on AI to identify discovery deficiencies in Defendant’s discovery responses does not “satisfy counsel’s obligation to meet and confer in good faith before asking the Court to wade into a discovery dispute,” and that while AI is a “useful tool,” it is “not a substitute for good lawyering.” Id. at 4.
Exploring Potential Antitrust Risks for Quantum Computing
Put “quantum” in front of almost anything and it tends to evoke a singular reaction: it must be highly technical, theoretical, or out of reach. But when it comes to “quantum computing” – especially the business of quantum computing – those instincts are misplaced. That is because the competitive dynamics…
End of the Sultan of Sulu Saga? The Paris Court of Appeal Annuls the Final Award
By Ilona Trouyet on
On December 9, 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal rendered what should be the ultimate decision in the Sultan of Sulu saga, annulling the final arbitral award that had purported to order Malaysia to pay US$ 14.92 billion to the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu. As we previously reported, the French Supreme Court’s November 6, 2024 ruling had already set the stage for this decision. The decision of the Paris Court of Appeal setting aside the final award, while expected, refines the Court’s reasoning and confirms the likely inapplicability of century-old colonial agreements.
Privilege Planning in the New Era
By Elizabeth Shrieves on
At the end of 2025, amendments were made to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that fundamentally change when and how litigators must address privilege issues in federal court. These amendments followed an important decision in the Sixth Circuit in In re FirstEnergy Corp., 154 F.4th 431 (6th Cir. 2025), which provided practitioners fresh guidance for protecting privileged materials early in the litigation. Understanding these developments and beginning to plan around privilege at the outset of a case is essential for anyone litigating in federal court today.