Alerts

Headlines that Matter for Companies and Executives in Regulated Industries

A recent decision by the Massachusetts Superior Court in Ford v. Vacationeer, LLC, et al. confirmed that commissions are not due or payable as wages until they are definitely and arithmetically determinable, and commissions are not determinable until all contingencies in the commission pay plan have been satisfied.

Columbia Sportswear and Columbia University both use the word mark “COLUMBIA” on apparel. To prevent confusion and avoid a trademark fight, the parties entered into a co-existence agreement in 2023 to let the University keep selling school merchandise but only if it paired “COLUMBIA” with clear references to the school (for example, “University,” the school shield, or “1754”).

On August 11, the California Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressing the interplay between the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and California’s statutory requirements for timely payment of arbitration fees in employment and consumer disputes.

Certain businesses implement dynamic pricing based on individual preferences or previously collected consumer data. This practice may soon be prohibited in New York if those websites fail to state, “THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA.”

On August 5, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a significant change in its vaccine development strategy, ending its support for mRNA vaccine projects under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).

Protecting trade secrets in the beverage and food industry requires planning and forethought from the outset of product development. Attempting after the fact to plug the holes in the company’s safeguards can be the path to a very expensive failure. A recent case from Wisconsin provides a vivid example of what can go wrong.

Headlines that Matter for Companies and Executives in Regulated Industries

A North Carolina federal court’s recent order granting remand in the case Nash Hospitals, Inc. v. UnitedHealthcare of North Carolina, Inc., et al., No. 5:25-CV-28-FL underscores the limits of federal question jurisdiction in disputes arising from health care provider-payer agreements, particularly where the claims are grounded in state law and do not necessarily require resolution of a substantial federal issue.

Following weeks of anticipation, the US Department of Commerce has issued its formal determination expanding the list of steel and aluminum products subject to the 50% ad valorem duties imposed under Section 232.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to prosecute Liberty Mutual after the insurer voluntarily self-disclosed misconduct.

On July 22, President Trump announced that the United States and Japan had reached a bilateral trade agreement, which if fully implemented, would reduce tariffs on Japanese imports to a baseline 15% rate in exchange for a Japanese commitment to invest $550 billion in the United States.

Welcome to the August 2025 issue of “As the (Customs and Trade) World Turns,” our monthly newsletter where we compile essential updates from the customs and trade world over the past month. We bring you the most recent and significant insights in an accessible format, concluding with our main takeaways — aka “And the Fox Says…” — on what you need to know.

On August 7, the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued Advisory Opinion No. 25-09, providing significant guidance for physician-owned medical device companies (PODs).

On August 7, the White House issued an Executive Order (EO) aimed at broadening Americans’ access to alternative asset investments within employer-sponsored defined-contribution retirement plans, such as 401(k) plans.

Last month, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that they are requesting data and information to help develop a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) for human food products. On the heels of this announcement, a former FDA commissioner has filed a petition asking the FDA to ban popular ingredients in UPFs entirely.

Headlines that Matter for Companies and Executives in Regulated Industries

On June 27, the US Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Trump v. Casa, clarifying the limits of federal district courts’ authority to issue broad, so-called “universal” injunctions against the federal government.

On July 25, the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issued new Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to the January 16 Information and Communication Technology and Services (ICTS) Rule that prohibits the import and sale of connected vehicles and their related hardware/software with a sufficient Chinese or Russian nexus, “Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain: Connected Vehicles” (the Rule).

Effective April 17, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) suspended the expedited examination process for design patent applications under 37 CFR 1.155, commonly referred to as the “Rocket Docket.”

On July 30, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its Expanded Decision Tree (EDT), a new science-based tool designed to screen and evaluate the safety or toxicity of chemicals in food.

A South Carolina state trial court recently dismissed a climate tort case filed by the City of Charleston seeking to hold major energy companies liable for harms allegedly caused by climate change. This ended a case that had bounced between state and federal courts for much of the last decade.

The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued new guidance to clarify and improve the evaluation of patent eligibility for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) inventions in order to foster innovation and patenting of these cutting-edge technologies.

On August 6, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an update regarding the use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), specifically fluoropolymers such as polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), in medical devices. The FDA concluded that, based on current scientific evidence, there is no reason to restrict the continued use of fluoropolymers in medical devices.

On July 31, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a new memorandum announcing that it will begin enforcing 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) that requires petitioners in inter partes review (IPR) proceeding to “specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed publications relied upon.”