In a significant early ruling, one of Texas’s newly established Business Courts addressed a key procedural question: whether pre-existing cases may be removed to the specialized forum. Judge Bill Whitehill’s October 30, 2024 decision in Energy Transfer LP v. Culberson Midstream LLC held that, regardless of subject matter, cases filed before September 1, 2024 must remain in their original courts.Continue Reading No Move to Greener Pastures: Texas Business Court Holds Parties May Not Remove Pre-September 1, 2024 Cases to New Court System

The January 1, 2025 deadline for any “reporting company” formed prior to January 1, 2024 to file a Beneficial Ownership Information Report (“BOIR”) with the Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) under the Corporate Transparency Act (the “CTA”) is quickly approaching. If you have not yet filed a BOIR or determined whether your company is required to do so under the CTA, this article will provide you with an overview of the most frequently asked questions regarding the CTA, its requirements, deadlines, penalties and most recent updates.Continue Reading The Corporate Transparency Act: What You Need to Know Ahead of the January 1, 2025 Deadline

The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, Directive (EU) 2022/2464 (CSRD) is part of the European Union’s efforts to enhance the scope and quality of sustainability reporting among companies. It imposes sustainability reporting obligations on an increased number of EU and non-EU companies. While some companies will have to file their reports as early 2025, most companies will have until 2026 to report on the financial year of 2025.Continue Reading Sustainability Reporting Obligations for EU and Non-EU Companies: The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive

On October 10, 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to the rules governing beneficial ownership reporting on Schedules 13D and 13G. While compliance with the amendments to the rules governing beneficial ownership reporting on Schedule 13D went into effect on February 5, 2024, compliance with the revised Schedule 13G filing deadlines set forth below are effective on September 30, 2024.Continue Reading Revised Schedule 13g Filing Deadlines Effective as of September 30, 2024 – What You Need to Know

In Samuelian v. Life Generations Healthcare, LLC, — Cal. App. 5th —, 2024 WL 3878448 (Cal. App. Aug. 20, 2024), the California Court of Appeal answered two long outstanding questions of California law concerning the enforceability of noncompetition agreements in the context of the sale of a business:Continue Reading California Court of Appeal Rules That Partial Sale of Business Can Bind Seller-Owner to a Noncompetition Agreement

More than two years after announcing the first round of settlements in the ongoing “off-channel communications” probe, the SEC recently announced another round of settlements with 26 financial firms, totaling $390 million in fines. These most recent settlements are notable for two reasons: (1) they include the SEC’s second settlement with an entity operating solely as a registered investment adviser (“RIA”) with no associated broker-dealer, and (2) the SEC has again explicitly noted that companies that self-reported obtained lower fines.Continue Reading Latest Round of SEC “Off-Channel” Communications Settlements Highlights Risks for Investment Advisers and Benefits of Self-Reporting

In Max Royal LLC v. Atieva, Inc., No. 23-16049, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 19910 (9th Cir. Aug. 8, 2024), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a securities class action brought by investors who purchased shares of the special purpose acquisition company Churchill Capital Corporation IV (“CCIV”) in early 2021 before it merged with Atieva, Inc. d/b/a Lucid Motors (“Lucid”) in July 2021. The three-judge panel held that purchasers of a security of an acquiring company do not have standing under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), to sue the target company for alleged misstatements by the target company made prior to the merger between the two companies. The Court’s decision provides protection to target company executives speaking to the press about their company’s forecasts and capabilities prior to acquisition by tightening the standing requirements for pre-acquisition SPAC investor plaintiffs.Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Applies Birnbaum Rule to Affirm Dismissal of Claims by SPAC Investors Asserted Against Target Company Executives for Pre-Merger Statements

As general interest and investment in AI has accelerated since the initial public launch of ChatGPT, so too has the U.S. federal government both increased its spending in the area[i] and the speed with which it adopted guidelines on the utilization of AI more generally.[ii] This tracks other actions outside the U.S.,[iii] and anticipates corresponding initiatives at the state and municipal levels.[iv]Continue Reading AI Considerations in Government Contract-Related M&A Transactions

Is your M&A target a company that develops or uses artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools? AI, and generative AI technologies specifically, are powerful business tools but present novel legal issues in the context of M&A transactions. It is increasingly important to identify and understand the unique legal risks associated with the use of AI technologies, tailor your diligence to investigate them and include AI-specific reps and warranties in your deal documents. To effectively do this, it is important to have someone well-versed in AI technology and the associated legal issues on the deal team. Many subtle issues, if not properly understood and addressed, can lead to liability and/or loss of business value. The attached article addresses the expansion of due diligence, beyond standard tech diligence, to include the analysis of AI tools developed or used by the target. It covers some of the key AI-specific legal issues to consider in M&A, but the issues in each transaction will be unique depending on the target company’s involvement with AI. Once you understand the target company’s involvement with AI, it is important to consider the unique legal issues and the diligence needed beyond the standard diligence questions.Continue Reading M&A Transactions: Diligencing AI Issues with Target Companies