Worldwide: Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

The Mortgage Bankers Association has filed a federal lawsuit challenging New Jersey's disparate impact discrimination rules, arguing they lack constitutional safeguards and conflict with federal law. The complaint asserts the rules impose unrecoverable compliance costs on lenders and create operational burdens by requiring different policies across states.

As artificial intelligence reshapes corporate marketing, .ai domain names have become prime digital real estate worth millions. A recent WIPO ruling in a high-profile dispute between a combat sports brand and a domain investor reveals critical lessons about trademark rights, bad faith claims, and the limits of domain seizure policies in the booming AI domain market.

The No Surprises Act's Independent Dispute Resolution process is undergoing a major technology transformation with a new centralized portal for open negotiations. This development introduces standardized procedures for billing disputes between healthcare providers and payers, but also raises critical questions about compliance, system capacity, and whether the portal adequately addresses persistent challenges in payment collection and claim eligibility determination.

The Eleventh Circuit’s recent decision in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC marks an important development in the ongoing constitutional debate surrounding the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions. By rejecting an Appointments Clause challenge, the court aligned itself with every other circuit that has spoken on the issue.

Karen R. Harned, Director of Litigation and Legal Policy for the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, discusses the federal challenge to Oregon's Extended Producer Responsibility law. The conversation explores NAW's mission, the Legal Policy Center's role, and the reasons behind the lawsuit against Oregon, culminating in Judge Michael H. Simon's August 27, 2026 ruling.

In a recent PTAB decision, Director Squires addressed whether Microsoft's IPR petition should proceed despite Sandpiper CDN's discretionary denial request. The ruling hinged on two critical factors: the novelty of Microsoft's art citations and Sandpiper CDN's failure to disclose its own commonly assigned prior art during patent prosecution. This case provides important guidance on how patent owners' prosecution conduct can impact discretionary denial outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has reaffirmed the Broad Institute's priority over the University of California in a high-stakes patent interference dispute involving CRISPR-Cas9 technology for eukaryotic cells. Following a Federal Circuit remand, the Board applied first-to-invent principles to determine which party successfully demonstrated conception and reduction to practice of this groundbreaking gene-editing system.

A federal court has ruled on the scope of enforcement authority under the House settlement's NIL framework, determining that multimedia rights companies and third-party brand sponsors cannot be categorically excluded from oversight. The decision preserves case-by-case analysis while affirming judicial review of the College Sports Commission's investigative practices, setting the stage for ongoing disputes over how NIL arrangements are regulated in college athletics.

The Second Circuit's decision upholding preemption of New York's mortgage escrow-interest law conflicts with First and Ninth Circuit rulings, while the OCC has issued regulations siding with the Second Circuit. With certiorari petitions pending and ten states now challenging the OCC's authority, the stage is set for a Supreme Court showdown over the scope of national bank preemption and state consumer financial law authority.