Lara Shortz has been extensively quoted in an article published by Hotel Dive titled, “Hotel Industry Players Challenge NLRB Joint Employer Rule.” The piece shines a light on legal challenges posed by hoteliers, among others across industries, to the National Labor Relations Board’s new joint employer rule. For her part, Lara comments on the see-saw nature of the rule and the significant financial exposure it can generate within the hospitality space.
Ashley Moore lent her IP know-how to the Global Legal Post in a story about a verdict just rendered by a federal court jury in Delaware that found Amazon liable for patent infringement through its Alexa product line. In her commentary, Ashley focused on the patent eligibility issues considered by the jury, which awarded $46.7 million in damages to voice technology company VB Assets.
Jennifer Mauri is one of the trademark pros featured in an IP Watchdog article titled, “Assessing the Arguments: Practitioners Predict Likely Loss for TRUMP TOO SMALL Applicant.” In the piece, Jennifer weighs in on Vidal v Elster, currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, and points to the high court’s apparent inclination to side with the USPTO by upholding the trademark office’s ability to refuse to register a trademark that identifies a living individual without that person’s consent.
Jennifer Mauri’s has been quoted in an article titled, “‘Trump Too Small’: SCOTUS Can Stop Being the Trademark Police’, Say,” published in World Intellectual Property Review. In the piece, Jennifer comments on Vidal v Elster, a case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, in which the justices are to determine whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s refusal to register a trademark, “Trump Too Small,” violated free speech rights. Jennifer suggests that the high court seems inclined to side with the USPTO’s decision to deny trademark protection for a T-shirt mocking former President Donald Trump.
Jennifer Mauri’s deep knowledge of trademark law is front and center in a story published about Vidal v Elster, a case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, in which the justices are to determine whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s refusal to register a trademark—”Trump Too Small”—violated free speech rights. In an article in the Daily Journal titled, “Justices Skeptical of Attempt to Trademark Trump’s Name,” Jennifer indicates that denial of trademark protection for a T-shirt mocking former President Donald Trump was likely proper, as it was based upon the applicable “living person” rule, rather than being a restriction of speech under the First Amendment.
Matthew Yarbrough weighed in on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s plan to file criminal complaints against the Texas House members tasked with prosecuting his impeachment. In a Law360 article titled, “Paxton House Complaints May Be ‘Tough Row To Hoe’,” Matthew outlines the challenges to a successful prosecution of state legislators given their clear investigative authority.
Dana Kravetz was a guest on the Know the Risk podcast, sitting down with host Jay Gates to discuss service charges in the restaurant and hospitality spaces and the potential pitfalls of implementing these fees.
Dana Kravetz has been quoted in an article published by CNBC titled, “A fight between fast-food chains and unions in California is over, for now – what to know.” The piece covers a deal that sets a wage floor of $20 per hour for California workers at fast-food chains with at least 60 locations nationwide, starting April 1, and going up from there. Dana commented on the agreement’s impact on joint-employer liability and the existing franchise mode.
Dana Kravetz was called upon by HOTELS Magazine to comment on the NLRB’s expansion of the joint employer rule and its impact upon the hospitality space. In an article titled, “New Joint Employer Rule Makes Companies, Franchisors More Liable For Employees,” Dana urges hoteliers to tread lightly when it comes to oversight of third-party workers. He also provides insight into what hotel owners and franchisors should keep top of mind going forward in order to avoid joint employer liability.
Bloomberg Law has reached out to Ashley Moore for comment on so-called “patent trolls”—those who monetize intellectual property through litigation and licensing. In an article, titled, “Critics Call Him a Patent Troll. He Prefers Modern-Day Edison,” Ashley comments on potential changes in the patent system that could serve to deter nuisance lawsuits.