Last week, the U.S. House and Senate released a discussion draft of the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA). This is the first bipartisan data privacy bill released at the federal level. The introduction of the ADPPA comes in the wake of a profusion of comprehensive state data privacy laws passed and considered over the last few months. To date, five states have passed comprehensive privacy laws, including Connecticut just last month. If passed, the ADPPA would largely preempt state privacy laws, with some narrow exceptions.
Judge Alan Albright, District Court Judge for the Western District of Texas, granted summary judgment in a patent infringement lawsuit brought against Bumble Trading LLC (Bumble), the dating app company, finding the patents asserted against it were invalid under the rarely-used “original patent” requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 251(a).
On Friday, March 25, the White House announced that it and the European Commission have “committed” to a new framework to facilitate data transfers from the EU to the US. The news is welcome, if frustratingly bare of detail, to the thousands of businesses that had relied on Privacy Shield to legitimize such transfers prior to the European Union’s Court of Justice (CJEU) decision in July 2020 invalidating it.
With almost every state adopting the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act (UETA) and the federal government enacting the Federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Cmmerce Act (15 U.S.C. § 7000, et seq.) (E-SIGN), the acceptance of electronic signatures has grown steadily in the past 20 years.
Since its enactment in 2008, the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) has prevented group health plans from imposing more restrictive benefit limitations on mental health or substance use disorder benefits compared to limitations on medical or surgical benefits.
After nearly two years of frustrating uncertainty regarding whether employers are required to pay employees for time spent undergoing COVID testing or health screenings, the United States’ Department of Labor (DOL) has finally provided some guidance.
Ted Smith, a partner in the Vorys Columbus Office, and Michelle Smith, an associate in the Vorys Cleveland office, co-authored an article titled “Liquidated Damages in Ohio Purchase and Sale Agreements” for The Practical Real Estate Lawyer.
Keeping up with the status of the various federal vaccine mandates over the past few months has felt like riding a bumpy and exhausting rollercoaster. In the hope that what follows lessens your confusion as you prepare for the holidays, the Vorys COVID Task Force has prepared a roundup of the latest on each of the federal mandates, with guidance on what to monitor as we head into 2022. We recognize that this information is likely to change in the coming days, but for now here are where things stand.
On December 15, 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) proposed amendments to the affirmative defense under Rule 10b5-1 and the Commission’s rules governing disclosure of share buybacks under Item 703 of Regulation S-K. The Commission also proposed new rules requiring disclosure of insider trading policies and practices and the creation of Form SR requiring accelerated disclosure relating to share buybacks. The proposed rules will be subject to a 45-day comment period following publication in the Federal Register.
The Ohio Senate recently passed, by a 24-7 vote, Amended House Bill 126 (“HB 126”) that will significantly change the administration of Ohio’s real property tax system if it is also passed by the House and signed by the Governor. It is unusual for us to report on pending legislation, but given the significance of the changes and the fact that it is already impacting pending matters this unusual step is warranted.