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

On July 20, 2026, Judge R. Gary Klausner of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California declared Vivek Shah a vexatious litigant and entered a pre-filing order requiring him...

Two small federal offices within the FMC and Surface Transportation Board quietly demonstrate how responsive government can resolve commercial disputes and assist transportation stakeholders. These programs help parties navigate regulatory questions and resolve disagreements before they escalate into costly litigation, serving as valuable resources for shippers, carriers, and consumers in the freight transportation network.

The Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court has issued a significant ruling in Brita SE v Wessper, finding indirect patent infringement through the supply of replacement filter cartridges. The decision explores critical questions about when supplying replacement parts crosses the line from permissible repair to impermissible reconstruction of a patented product, and whether patent exhaustion can serve as a defense in such cases.

The Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court has issued a significant ruling in Brita SE v Wessper, finding indirect patent infringement through the supply of replacement filter cartridges. The decision explores critical questions about when supplying replacement parts crosses the line from permissible repair to impermissible reconstruction of a patented product, and whether patent exhaustion can serve as a defense in such cases.

A legal battle in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenges the DEA's final order to reschedule marijuana to Schedule III, with threshold procedural questions about standing, stays, and intervention potentially determining the fate of state-legal medical marijuana programs before the court even reaches the merits of the rescheduling decision. The litigation centers on whether the Department of Justice exceeded its statutory authority and whether additional treaty-compliance regulations required formal ru

Written discovery is a fundamental component of litigation that many individuals encounter for the first time when involved in a lawsuit. Understanding how to effectively respond to requests for admissions...

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