United States: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Companies that interact with federal agencies face growing risks that sensitive business information could be disclosed through Freedom of Information Act requests. Understanding FOIA Exemption 4 protections and implementing proactive confidentiality practices can help organizations safeguard trade secrets, commercial data, and proprietary information from public release.

Recent U.S. court decisions are reshaping the legal landscape for Japanese companies operating in America, from massive antitrust verdicts to contested tariff refunds and discovery conflicts. Five critical developments from May through July 2026 demand attention from Japanese businesses engaged in U.S. trade and litigation. Understanding these rulings is essential for managing legal risk and protecting commercial interests in the American market.

A federal magistrate judge in California has ruled that the use of generative AI in document review is subject to the same reasonableness and proportionality standards as traditional Technology Assisted Review (TAR), establishing that courts will not impose special requirements on AI-powered review tools absent specific evidence of deficiency. The decision addresses key questions about pre-culling documents with search terms before AI review and the extent to which parties must disclose validation metrics f

How family law mediation can help parties break cycles of powerlessness, escalation and conflict

As the Federal Maritime Commission's adjudicatory workload has quadrupled since 2020, its Office of Administrative Law Judges operates with minimal permanent staff and no dedicated law clerks. With demurrage and detention litigation surging and new enforcement matters on the horizon, the question emerges whether current judicial resources can sustain fair and efficient resolution of increasingly complex shipping disputes.

When FIFA's 2026 World Cup came to Dallas, a nearly 30-year-old marine conservation mural was painted over without the artist's consent, sparking a federal lawsuit under the Visual Artists Rights Act.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has affirmed a preliminary injunction against Nielsen in a landmark constructive tying case, establishing that pricing differentials alone can constitute illegal tying under the Sherman Act when they leave buyers with no economically rational alternative. This ruling carries significant implications for data, analytics, and subscription-based businesses that employ bundled pricing strategies, as it confirms that antitrust liability can arise from pricing structu

A decade after the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Universal Health Services v. Escobar, the False Claims Act landscape remains mired in confusion and uncertainty. How has this pivotal ruling reshaped FCA litigation, and what challenges continue to plague the doctrines of falsity, materiality, and scienter in federal enforcement actions?

A recent GAO decision appears to significantly raise the bar for protesters seeking to demonstrate competitive prejudice in bid protests. The decision requires "convincing evidence" rather than the longstanding "reasonable possibility" standard, potentially marking a major shift in how protesters must substantiate their claims of harm from agency procurement errors.

For hundreds of years, the world’s sovereign nations refused to allow any other foreign sovereign to be sued in their courts without the sovereign’s consent. The guiding principle was “absolute sovereign immunity,” an outgrowth of the ancient legal precept rex non potest peccare, understood to mean “the king can do no wrong.” The principle also was recognized as wise foreign policy because it extended "grace and comity" to other sovereigns.

On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in two enforcement proceedings under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), leaving intact D.C. Circuit rulings that rejected sovereign immunity defenses...

The Supreme Court's decision in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación CIMEX, S.A. fundamentally alters the landscape for litigation under the Helms-Burton Act by eliminating sovereign immunity as a defense for Cuban state-owned entities. This ruling opens the door for U.S. nationals to pursue trafficking claims against Cuban government agencies and instrumentalities without satisfying the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's stringent exceptions. The decision raises critical questions about enforcement mechan