HB Partner Webinars on the West LegalEdcenter
Take these CLE webinars on the West LegalEdcenter platform. Each program features leading litigators in their respective fields on emerging subjects. Speakers and topics are handpicked by HB. Your organization may have already subscribed to the platform, but each session is also available for individual purpose. For questions or if you wish to propose a webinar, write to us at: Webinars@LitigationConferences.com.
Cyber Captive Survey 2019 — AON
Aon’s Cyber Captive Survey 2019 says that the rapid growth in the captive market of cyber-specific policies underscores that cyber is one of the primary risks for organizations across the world driven by an increasingly complex operational, technological and regulatory environment. Key findings include: Healthcare and energy industries are leading the way, with 19% and 15% of organizations in these industries utilizing captives for cyber coverage respectively. 41% of captives surveyed are incubating cyber risk. The range in limits of cover taken out is up to USD$100 million. An estimated 34% of all captives will be writing cyber in five years’ time. Read the complete report here!
Nevada to try limited banking for cash-heavy pot industry — ElkoDaily.com
Most marijuana dispensaries are forced to handle massive amounts of cash. Business owners are paying their employees with envelopes full of dollar bills, and bringing duffle bags full of money to government buildings to pay their taxes. That could all change with the new Nevada state law that allows dispensaries to offer a cashless option. This program will be tested for three years before being considered as a permanent feature. State Treasurer Zach Conine likened the system to gift cards or digital apps such as Venmo and said the program would not include broader banking services like loans. Since marijuana is still not legal federally, states are on their own with coming up with a cashless option. Hawaii took similar steps and included a debit payment app, which has spread to other states as well. California lawmakers are also devising a cashless system by creating a class of banks specifically for the industry. This temporary law is set to take place by July 1, 2020 with the hopes of easing transactions and lessen cash handling for customers and businesses Read the complete post by Michelle L. Price on ElkoDaily.com here!
First Class Action Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Victims of First American Title Company Data Breach — Yahoo!
"Gibbs Law Group LLP has filed the first nationwide class action lawsuit accusing First American Title Company of failing to properly secure 885 million sensitive customer files, instead choosing to store them in a 'woefully insecure,'” publicly-accessible system. “First American has turned the American dream of home ownership into a financial security nightmare for its customers,” according to the complaint. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that First American Title Company was negligent, and violated its contracts with customers, in the way it stored their personal information, which included bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, financial and tax records, and photos of their drivers’ licenses. "This grave lapse in security resulted in publicly exposing hundreds of millions of customers’ personal files, leaving them vulnerable to identify theft and other cybercrimes," the plaintiffs maintain. Read the complete Press Release on Yahoo! here
Wells Fargo Proposes to Settle Auto Insurance Case for $386M — Yahoo!
In 2017 customers of Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) filed a class action lawsuit alleging the bank forced unwanted auto insurance without permission from the customers. Currently WFC plans to pay around $386 million to settle the 2017 class action lawsuit. The high payout is due to the sheer number of customers affected. About 270,000 WFC customers were "pushed into delinquency " and "almost 25,000 wrongful vehicle repossessions." In addition to the class action settlement, WFC will be reaching out to individual customers offering financial service recovery, and restructuring their leadership teams. WFC is still seeing a decrease in sales and their numbers. In six months WFC shares "lost 4.5% against 6.5% growth recorded by the industry." Read the complete post on Yahoo! here.
The Future of Cyber Operations and the Government
In the forthcoming National Defense Authorization Act the House Armed Services Committee -- specifically the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threat Capabilities -- seeks to amend the annual legislation to ensure that Congress is informed when the executive branch executes offensive or defensive cyber operations. The bill defines offensive or defensive cyber operations as a “sensitive military operation.” The goal of this shared information is additional oversight, especially given the newness of cyber tactics. As reported by journalist Derek B. Johnson of FWC.com, two covert cyber operations have taken place since POTUS announced the new policy. The first was in October 2018, a cyber operation with a goal of informing Russian operatives not to meddle with the midterm election. The second took place the following November in which the U.S. Cyber Command blocked access to Russian Internet Research Agency post election. While these two operations have been called “mild” in some critiques, former White House Director of Cyber Infrastructure Protection under President George W. Bush, Jason Healey, believes this highly specialized tactic is ideal since it presents the least potential for collateral damage. While Healey warns against grand and overt attacks, he states that sometimes "conflict is straightforward and you just have to stop adversaries from punching you in the mouth.” Read the complete post by Derek B. Johnson on FCW.com here.
The New York Privacy Act Would Allow Direct Action
The New York Privacy Act, introduced last month by state Sen. Kevin Thomas, advocates for consumer agency over their personal data and would give New Yorkers the right to sue companies directly for privacy violations. Thomas wants companies to put customer data protection ahead of their budgetary and business goals. The bill summary reads: "Enacts the NY privacy act to require companies to disclose their methods of de-identifying personal information, to place special safeguards around data sharing and to allow consumers to obtain the names of all entities with whom their information is shared; creates a special account to fund a new office of privacy and data protection." "Fiduciaries, like an attorney or a doctor, hold onto your information. They don't share it, unless there is a need for the purpose for which they collected it,” Thomas said. “That's not what's going on here with these data companies and these data brokers. They're sharing it, and we're getting targeted.” Pushback from the tech industry has been swift. John Olsen, Director of the Internet Association, said, “The NY Privacy Act, in its current form, is unworkable for businesses that want to comply and fails to provide New York residents meaningful control over how their data is collected, used, and protected." Facebook also chimed in saying they would have to shut down Facebook access to New York users if the bill becomes law. Read the NY Senate Bill S5642.
CannaLawBlog — Legalizing Cannabis Cash
On May 20, 2019 banking associations from all 50 states and 1 territory sent a letter to Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee urging them to conduct hearings on the merits of providing cannabis-related business access to banking services. CannaLawBlog highlighted the primary concerns of the letter in a recent post: "Again, the primary concern expressed was that current law forces state-legal businesses to operate on a cash basis, which poses a safety risk, complicates enforcement efforts, and could damage local economies." The banking associations wanted to emphasize their neutrality on the legality of cannabis, rather they wanted to show strength as a national community and validate, support, and respect those communities that have voted for legalized recreational marijuana. Read the complete post by HarrisBricken attorney Jihee Ahn on The CannaLawBlog.
CNN — Jury returns $2 billion verdict against Monsanto for couple with cancer — the biggest so far
[one-half-first] [/one-half-first] [one-half] A California jury returned a $2.055 billion verdict against Monsanto and their popular weed killer, Roundup. “The verdict in Oakland includes more than $55 million in compensatory damage and $2 billion in punitive damages.” The septuagenarian plaintiffs, represented by attorney Michael Miller of The Miller Firm, were a California couple that said long-term exposure to Roundup caused both of them to be diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer that usually cannot be traced back to a source according to the American Cancer Society. The particular carcinogen in Roundup is glyphosate, which the EPA has stated was not a carcinogen in a 2015 assessment, which contradicts WHO’s statement that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans”. While a Monsanto spokesperson previously denied any manipulation, a jury found that a series of texts and emails between Monsanto and the EPA that proved Monsanto culpable of manipulating science. [/one-half] Read the complete post by Michael Nedelman on CNN.com here!
Dr. Babyl: Artificial Intelligence Could Save Lives, Time and Money — TheDailyBeast.com
Itchy throat? Headache? Upset stomach? There's an app for that. There is a new AI healthcare system called Babylon UK’s National Health Service which features an AI-driven app that is reportedly able to separate “run-of-the-mill” illnesses from more life-threatening ones, while saving time, money, and anxiety for patients and doctors alike. Babylon offers more than diagnostic assistance; it is accessible to people in remote areas. "For example, Babyl, the Rwandan version of Babylon, offers remote appointments with clinicians, fills prescriptions, orders lab tests, and issues referrals.” Babyl enables affordable, personalized healthcare, combined with “the brains of thousands of doctors at once” to reach patients who cannot get to a doctor’s officer. In addition to assisting doctors with everyday check-ups and treating the common cold, the AI’s abilities extend to clinical trials. “In 2018 the Mayo Clinic partnered with IBM’s Watson to match patients with breast cancer to accessible clinical trials covered by their health plans. The matching program increased the enrollment of breast cancer sufferers in Mayo Clinic’s own clinical trials by 80%." Questions are being raised, however, about how to mitigate risks posed by hacking or by nefarious manipulation of the system. Read about this and more in the complete post by Joelle Renstrom on TheDailyBeast.com.
The Wrong-Headedness of Hindsight Standards — Michelle Yeary | Drug & Device Law Blog
Dechert LLP attorney Michelle Yeary cautions against applying perfect hindsight to drug liability. "We all know hindsight is 20/20. And, it’s easy. There are dozens of television and radio programs that thrive on Monday morning quarterbacking. There’s no risk in saying the coach should have called for a pass when you already know the run didn’t work. It’s also dangerous because it’s easy. People are often too quick to point out that you should have taken path B after everyone learns path A is full of potholes. Pointing it out is one thing, holding you liable for it is another." Yeary takes a look at what happened in Holley v. Gilead Science, Inc., 2019 WL 2077845 (N.D. Cal. May 10, 2019). The case involves two of the main active ingredients in AIDS drugs: TDF and TAF. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant should be responsible for allegedly knowingly using TDF over TAF (allegedly a safer alternative). TDF was FDA approved first and TAF second. Unfortunately, Yeary wrote, hindsight "can be used to demand perfection," allowing plaintiffs to "proceed on what is essentially a stop-selling theory," that first-generation drugs should not be submitted to the FDA because, in hindsight, "later approved treatments were safer." That's what happened in Holley, she said. Read the complete post by Michelle Yeary on the Drug and Device Law Blog here. Read the opinion here.
J&J Hit with $120 Million Verdict at Mesh Trial
A Philadelphia jury returned a $120 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson after finding that a negligently designed pelvic mesh implant caused chronic pain and suffering, which left plaintiff Susan McFarland incontinent and unable to have sex for the last 10 years. McFarland alleged the implant she received in 2008 caused the product to saw through the soft tissue in her pelvis and become exposed in her vagina. She had to undergo a second surgery to remove a portion of the implant (Susan McFarland,et al. v. Ethicon Inc., et al., No. 130701577, Phila. Comm. Pls. Ct.). This is the second of two trials. The jury in the first trial was deadlocked, unable to agree on the extent of negligence of the design of the Ethicon product. Tracie Palmer, McFarland’s attorney, added in the second trial that the vaginal mesh was on market prior to clinical studies determining its safety and efficacy. Defense attorney Adam Spicer maintained that the chronic pain McFarland experienced could be due to other causes, including her age. He said the product had been used for years prior. McFarland’s case is one of more than 100,000 cases brought together in the MDL, down from nearly 105,000 cases against seven manufacturers. The MDL will be closing and there will be two more waves of trial, with next wave comprising 150 cases. Final settlement conferences are scheduled for August 1 with trial set to begin August 14. McFarland and her husband are represented by Tracie Palmer, Braden Lepisto, Shanin Specter and Lee Balefsky of Kline & Specter PC. Ethicon is represented by Kate Skagerberg of Beck Redden LLP, Adam Spicer, Paul Rosenblatt and Jordan Walker of Butler Snow LLP, and D. Alicia Hickok, Kenneth Murphy and Melissa Merk of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP.
Suits Allege Apple Concealed Knowledge of iPhone 7 Defect
Apple Inc. has been sued in federal courts in Illinois and California for allegedly knowingly selling iPhone 7 and 7 plus models with an audio chip defect, called the “Audio IC Defect” or “Loop Disease” by consumers, which causes an array of operational issues. The bug gums up handset audio functions, grays out speaker buttons during calls, and degrades microphone fidelity. And if that's not enough it can kill Siri's voice command capabilities. The plaintiffs accuse Apple of actively concealing the Audio IC Defect while advertising the iPhone 7 as “the best iPhone we ever made.” The plaintiffs claim that when they first experienced operational problems Apple didn't offer complimentary repairs. The suits allege breach of warranty and violation of California and Illinois consumer protection laws. Plaintiffs seek class certification, damages, attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. In Illinois, the plaintiffs may also try to force Apple to repair, recall, and/or replace current defective iPhone 7s in the United States and notify all purchasers of the Loop Disease. Evidence shows “Apple’s internal acknowledgement and subsequent discontinuation of their out-of-warranty repairs without public announcement of the Audio IC Defect amounts to misrepresentation and concealment of the Audio IC Defect,” the California complaint in Casillas v. Apple reads. Complaints available on Scribd.com. Casillas v. Apple, N.D. Calif., No. 3:19-cv-2455 Castelli v. Apple, N.D. Ill., Eastern Div., No. ______
Artificial Intelligence: DeepMind on Debugging Learned Predictive Models
DeepMind, an artificial intelligence research company, in a recent blog post discusses three ways to eliminate bugs in learned predictive models. The company was founded in London in 2010. Google acquired it in 2014. In addition to London they have research centers in Edmonton and Montreal, Canada, and a DeepMind Applied team in Mountain View, California. "Bugs and software have gone hand in hand since the beginning of computer programming," the post reads. "Over time, software developers have established a set of best practices for testing and debugging before deployment, but these practices are not suited for modern deep learning systems. Today, the prevailing practice in machine learning is to train a system on a training data set, and then test it on another set. While this reveals the average-case performance of models, it is also crucial to ensure robustness, or acceptably high performance even in the worst case. In this article, we describe three approaches for rigorously identifying and eliminating bugs in learned predictive models: adversarial testing, robust learning, and formal verification." Read the complete post here!
Top Five Things to Know if You’re Building Your Cannabis Empire Through M&A — CannaLawBlog
Cannabis is associated with calm. Joining the industry is anything but. Hilary Bricken already has nearly a decade of experience in the field of cannabis law. She founded the Canna Law Blog in 2010, which now has several contributors from the Harris Bricken firm and is easily one of the best out there. Her latest post offers insights on companies who wish to build their cannabis business through mergers and acquisitions. In her May 6 post, titled "Top Five Things to Know if You're Building Your Cannabis Empire Through M&A," she writes: "It’s no secret that multiple state-by-state operators are building their cannabis empires through aggressive mergers and acquisitions. Last year, our cannabis business attorneys closed more than $100 million in cannabis company acquisitions, and that shows no signs of stopping in 2019. Cannabis M&A is not your run-of-the-mill business dealing though, and working from boilerplate, rote M&A documents is hugely dangerous. In addition, diligence is oftentimes like a regulatory spiderweb laden with liabilities that other businesses do not face. In addition, the barriers to entry in the cannabis industry are increasingly high, tedious, and protectionist, which can really torture business deals." Bricken writes that "if you find yourself turning into a larger multi-state operator though acquiring cannabis businesses," there are at least five things you should know. Read on for what she has to say. Read the complete post on CannaLawBlog.com here. Cannabis photo by Matthew Brodeur on UnSplash.com
Moving Your Corporate Data to the Cloud: Top 13 Things to Think About as you Review Your Hosting Agreement — Judy Selby Consulting
Some data migration risks can be mitigated at the cloud contract stage, Allison Bird, Judy Selby’s partner at Clearview Privacy Consulting LLC, explains. Regarding indemnification, Bird says, "If data is lost or exposed by the hosting company, your company as well as any affiliates who use the services will be subject to suits from clients and individuals whose data was impacted. You may also be subject to regulatory scrutiny which could result in legal costs and regulatory penalties. To the extent possible, negotiate a full indemnification of third party claims arising out of the hosting services." She says the limitation of liability section of your hosting agreement "may be the single most important" part. "Your hosting company may make a lot of promises in the agreement. However, if their liability under the agreement is significantly capped, you won’t receive the monetary compensation necessary to make up for hosting company’s acts and omissions that damage the company. Negotiations for a higher cap will translate into real dollars in the event of a security incident." Of course, insurance is always a good solution if done right. "You can negotiate the perfect contract but unless your hosting company has a deep pocket, it may not have sufficient capital to make good on contractual obligations in the event of a breach or data loss situation, especially one affecting many of its customers," Bird says. "Consider adding language into the agreement which requires your hosting company to maintain insurance (with your company as a named insured) covering data breach and inability to access data." Read the complete post by Allison Bird on Judy Selby Consulting's blog.
The Cloud: Selected Benefits, Risks, and Insurance Coverage Issues (Part 1) — Barnes & Thornburg
Cloud Risk: Do You Transfer Liability Along with Data? Many of us were using data clouds before we even knew what they were. Now, while most of us are comfortable with the concept, we may not be comfortable knowing who is liable when data is lost, damaged or breached. It's not a given that your cloud provider absorbs any liabilities, and it's not a given they can even afford the liability should it arise. Below are quotes from an article by Scott Godes, Kara Cleary, and Heidi Fessler of Barnes & Thornburg LLP on the subject, and a link to their complete article. Godes, Cleary, and Fessler list several cloud-related risks: data breaches, data loss, interruption of access, compromised credentials and broken authentication, and denial of service. But two other categories for concern are: #1. BYOC, or Bring Your Own Cloud. Employees may be innocently using productivity applications that store work data on non-company clouds, in effect, "bringing their own clouds" to the workplace. #2. Multi-Tenancy. This involves risks posed when unrelated cloud users are sharing the same computing resources. "Both the cloud provider and the user must be aware of system and data security to prevent a breach in the security. In addition, when a risk is realized, it may not always be clear who is at fault for the system or security failure. "There are a lot of misconceptions around the cloud and liability," the Barnes & Thornburg attorneys write. "Many companies assume that along with the transfer of their data, they have also transferred their risk to the cloud provider," they say. "Absent a clear agreement that shifts liability to the cloud provider, the practical reality is that in most cases, there’s very little protection in terms of liability with cloud providers, unless parties are willing [...]
Anderson Kill’s 5th Annual Cyber Insurance Recovery Conference
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half]Recent news of "Collection 1", a cache of sensitive data now appearing for sale on the dark web and comprised of an astonishing 773 million records, is a grim reminder of the scope of cyber perils for most. Last year's staggering tally of serious data breaches and theft coupled with a spate of new legislation for companies gathering, hosting and selling consumer data means policyholders must rise to the challenge. New state legislation compounds an already daunting federal and international regulatory landscape, and regulatory compliance will be a must to deal with the attendant fines, penalties and consumer claims that non-compliance can trigger. New technology also continues to drive the evolving conversation about the legal relationships between parties transacting business electronically. Risks range from anonymity that raises jurisdictional and collection issues to “immutable” record keeping that creates a permanent, public record of transactions. --Anderson Kill [/one-half] Find out more about this complimentary seminar from Anderson Kill here!
Spotify Tells EU Apple is Hampering Competitors as Apple Music Surpasses Spotify in U.S. — MoginRubin
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half] "Apple Music recently surpassed Spotify in the U.S. market, according to the Wall Street Journal, signing up 28 million subscribers compared to Spotify’s 26 million. Spotify continues to have more total subscribers, however. "Spotify Founder and CEO Daniel Elk took to the company blog to make his case, saying, “Apple operates a platform that, for over a billion people around the world, is the gateway to the internet. Apple is both the owner of the iOS platform and the App Store—and a competitor to services like Spotify. In theory, this is fine. But in Apple’s case, they continue to give themselves an unfair advantage at every turn.” "In a recent statement, Apple says it revolutionized the distribution of music with iTunes, and did the same thing with the App Store, something that has created “many millions of jobs” and, it says, generated more than $120 billion for developers and new industries." Read the complete post on the MoginRubin Blog here! [/one-half]
Philadelphia Jury Hits J&J with $120M Award in Mesh Injury Case — Law360
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half] "Jurors credited claims from Susan McFarland that the negligent design of a mesh implant she received in 2008 caused the product to saw through the soft tissue in her pelvis and become exposed in her vagina. She was eventually forced to undergo a second surgery to remove a portion of the implant. "The pain she’s been left with as a result of the complications, she says, has prevented her from having sex with her husband for the last 10 years. "This is the second time jurors have been asked to determine whether McFarland and her husband should be awarded damages for injuries she attributes to alleged defects in a so-called TVT-O implant she received to treat urinary stress incontinence." Read the complete article on Law360 here. [/one-half]
Top Class Actions: Vaccine Litigation Case Roundup
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half]There have been numerous lawsuits filed alleging injuries caused by the shingles vaccine Zostavax. Cases have stated they were not warned of the adverse side effects of the vaccine alleging it caused the diseases it is meant to prevent, among other things. Here is what the CDC says to consumers: “Your risk of shingles and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) increases as you get older. CDC recommends that people 60 years old and older get shingles vaccine (Zostavax®) to prevent shingles and PHN. Shingrix (recombinant zoster vaccine) is the preferred vaccine, over Zostavax® (zoster vaccine live), a shingles vaccine in use since 2006. Zostavax may still be used to prevent shingles in healthy adults 60 years and older. For example, you could use Zostavax if a person is allergic to Shingrix, prefers Zostavax, or requests immediate vaccination and Shingrix is unavailable. Zostavax (zoster vaccine live) was licensed by the FDA in 2006. This vaccine reduces the risk of developing shingles by 51% and PHN by 67%. It is given in one dose as a shot, and can be given in a doctor’s office or pharmacy.“ Read more: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/shingles/public/zostavax/index.html The vaccine is produced by Merck & Co. Their product information can be found here: https://www.merckvaccines.com/Products/Zostavax Here is a roundup of the cases filed. [/one-half] 1.Husband and Wife File Zostavax Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit "A North Carolina husband and wife recently filed a new Zostavax shingles vaccine lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co., alleging the vaccine caused serious side effects. "The plaintiff, Cecilia S., says she was inoculated with the Zostavax vaccine on March 5, 2017, in order to prevent shingles (or herpes zoster). Unfortunately, the day after receiving this vaccine, Cecilia alleges she suffered from a number of problems, including herpes zoster, cellulitis, and postherpetic neuralgia." 2. Zostavax Lawsuit Says Vaccine Caused Shingles "West Virginia patient [...]
The Need for Real MDL Rules Will Only Grow More Acute — Drug and Device Law Blog
By Bexis [one-half-first].[/one-half-first] [one-half]"In the ensuing procedural gamesmanship, plaintiffs are in the process of losing one of the main ways they gamed the system to keep diverse cases in state court – the so-called 'forum defendant rule' whereby even a diverse action could be kept in state court by the presence of defendant domiciled in the plaintiff’s chosen forum. The forum defendant rule applies only to parties 'properly joined and served,' and technologically-savvy defendants have discovered that, by monitoring electronic dockets, they can remove diverse cases faster than plaintiffs can serve forum defendants. We call this 'pre-service,' 'snap,' or 'wrinkle' removal, and we’ve chronicled (and advocated) its rise since 2007." Read the complete post by Bexis on Drug and Device Law Blog here. [/one-half] This is an excellent blog. One of my favorites. It's unapologetically defense-oriented, of course. A phrase like "gamed the system" is practically an invitation for rebuttal! So if you would like to respond, rebut, or rebuke, please write to us at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. --Tom Hagy, HB
Product Liability in the Internet of Things — Schiff Hardin Product Liability & Mass Torts Blog
[one-half-first] Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash [/one-half-first] [one-half]"Combining a physical object and an intangible technology also creates a novel issue when it comes to strict product liability principles, which typically hold that a product manufacturer may be strictly liable for a product’s defect. The first task in a strict product liability case is to identify the product. In the context of a device that has no internet connectivity, the answer is straightforward. If a ladder is defective and causes an injury, the ladder’s manufacturer may be held strictly liable because a ladder is the product. But when it comes to IoT devices, the line may be blurred. Almost always, the software part of the IoT device is 'manufactured' by a separate entity from the entity that manufactures the physical object. If the IoT device proves to be defective, the question becomes which entity may be held strictly liable." Read the complete post by Schiff Hardin's Gregory Dickinson & Jeffrey D. Skinner here. [/one-half]
National Geographic Disclosed Customer Info, Class Action Says — Top Class Actions Blog
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half] "The National Geographic class action states that prior to and at the time that he subscribed to the magazine, the company did not notify him that it discloses the personal reading information of its customers. "Markham also claims that he wasn’t provided with any written notice that National Geographic makes a practice of renting, exchanging, or otherwise disclosing personal reading information to third parties, and provides no means of opting out. "However, the National Geographic information disclosure class action lawsuit says that since subscribing to National Geographic and between Mach 26, 2016 andJuly 30, 2016, National Geographic disclosed Markham’s personal reading information to data aggregators, data appenders, and/or data cooperatives." Read the complete post by Top Class Actions Editor Emily Sortor here. [/one-half]
A Generic Drug Failure to Warn Claim? –Michelle Hart Yeary
[one-half-first][/one-half-first] [one-half] "Rather than focusing on what plaintiff’s off-label marketing claim really was – a claim that defendant’s label should have contained different information or warnings about off-label uses – an impliedly preempted claim, the court got distracted trying to fit the case in under Bausch and started talking about parallel violation claims. "The court found that because plaintiff was alleging a violation of federal regulations, his claims “run parallel to [defendant’s] state law duties,” and thus were not preempted. The problem with this is that Mensing is not an express preemption case. It was an implied preemption case, and the district court had no business applying 'parallel claim' analysis to implied preemption, where a 'parallel claim' exception does not exist. It makes no difference whether plaintiff’s off-label promotion claim is 'parallel' to federal regulations, defendant could not have offered any different warning so any claim that the warning or information it provided was inadequate is preempted under Mensing. The court was trying to fit a square peg into a round whole – and the only way that works is to cut off the corners." Read the complete post by Dechert's Michelle Hart Yeary here! [/one-half]
One Stock for the Coming Marijuana Boom, Says The Motley Fool
"This legal pot stock could be like buying Amazon for $3.19." "Cannabis legalization is sweeping over North America – 10 states plus Washington, D.C., have all legalized recreational marijuana over the last few years, and full legalization arrived in Canada in October 2018. Legal marijuana is worth an estimated $50 billion for the U.S. today. And since experts have projected the U.S. industry to skyrocket to $80 billion by 2030, it’s time for investors to start paying attention. Because whether or not you’re planning on ingesting any THC, you can’t deny the monumental investing opportunity that a potentially $80 billion industry represents." --Grace Phillips, in an article for The Motley Fool