Samuel Weglein’s Post

Practicing white collar lawyers, corporate GCs, and anyone running a business that might be called upon to respond to a federal grand jury subpoena (basically any entity) should pay close attention to this case. You should assume anything you produce to the government can and will become public. Eight years ago, VW produced millions of documents to a grand jury in connection with the emissions scandal investigation. DOJ found the evidence meaningful and VW’s cooperation worth a substantial reduction in its corporate sentence, entered following a guilty plea. A professor then filed a FOIA request to find out just what was so valuable in those documents. And, in what appears to be a first, a federal judge has ordered DOJ to disclose in the FOIA litigation potentially a million documents previously produced under the veil of grand jury secrecy. Regardless of what you think of FOIA’s application, whether the documents are agency records, or how Rule 6 applies to documents of investigation subjects, the bottom line is that anyone producing documents should understand they lose control over those records and what is done with them. And you should assume there is risk that, by trial or by FOIA request, they become public.

Section 285 Sanctions in Dismissed Case - TexIPLawBlog.com Judge Rosenthal granted Defendant Volkswagen's motion for fees following a dismissal on the merits, citing a plethora of flaws in the plaintiff's case. They included: (1) seeking an injunction and future damages for an expired patent; (2) seeking pre-suit damages when there was no marking compliance (and no, being a NPE doesn't excuse application of the statute); and (3) failing to disclose, and in fact lying about the existence of 11 prior settlement agreements. There was oh, so much more, but the bottom line was that the court found VDPP and its counsel, William P. Ramey, III of Ramey LLP, jointly and severally liable for the reasonable attorneys’ fees that Volkswagen incurred in defending this case. Volkswagen has not yet submitted the amount, but its filings indicated it would be seeking at least $121,518 in fees. https://lnkd.in/g5NVd_AJ #SDTX #TexIPLawBlog

BMW, VW see appeal court back UK regulator in territorial-scope judgment BMW Group and Volkswagen Group saw appeal judges confirm that the UK antitrust regulator has the power to require overseas companies to produce documents and information when investigating suspected anti-competitive conduct. The UK Competition and Markets Authority had challenged a Competition Appeal Tribunal decision that said the CMA had gone beyond its powers in seeking force BMW Group to comply with information requests in a vehicle-recycling antitrust probe. The regulator had earlier fined BMW Group for failing to provide information from its headquarters in Germany. The Court of Appeal said that the CMA’s ability to conduct competition probes would be compromised were it unable to obtain information from overseas, and create “a perverse incentive for conspirators to move offshore to organize cartels directed at harming the United Kingdom market,” according to a CMA statement today. The CMA appealed both the CAT decision to the Court of Appeal, as well as a decision by the UK High Court to allow a claim brought by Volkswagen for judicial review against the CMA’s move to formally seek information. The Court of Appeal found that nothing in “logic, policy, case law or legislative history” supported the restrictive interpretation adopted by the CAT and High Court, the CMA said. To read the full article, published exclusively on MLex Market Insight, a LexisNexis company please connect with me for an initial consultation. #antitrust #probe #automotivesector #automotiveindustry

🚨 Case Briefing Announcement: Continental vs. Avanci 🚨 I am excited to announce the release of a detailed case briefing on Continental vs. Avanci (Civil Action No. 3:19-cv-02933-M), presided over by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. Introduction This case involves Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. filing a lawsuit against several defendants, including Nokia, Conversant, Optis, and Sharp (collectively known as the Licensor Defendants), over the licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs) critical for 2G, 3G, and 4G automotive connectivity. Continental, a key producer of telematics control units for vehicles, alleges that these defendants, through Avanci, LLC, are not providing licenses on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms as required. The plaintiff contends this refusal to negotiate FRAND licenses stifles competition, hampers innovation in the automotive supply chain, and ultimately harms consumers. The case raises important questions about antitrust laws and the balance between patent rights and market competition, touching upon violations of the Sherman Act. 📄 Read the full briefing to get in-depth insights into the facts, allegations, and legal arguments of this pivotal case. Stay informed and engaged with the latest legal developments in the automotive and telecommunications industries! #LegalUpdate #CaseBriefing #AutomotiveIndustry #PatentLaw #AntitrustLaw #Telematics #Innovation #FRAND #ContinentalVsAvanci #LinkedInLegal #TechLaw

Are you planning to buy a new motor vehicle? You should know the federal Lemon Law. It is a piece of federal legislation designed to protect consumers who purchase or lease new motor vehicles. Its primary purpose is to ensure that consumers receive what they paid for—a vehicle free from substantial defects. For more info, visit 👉 https://lnkd.in/eK4ZRNmN #LegalFix #A2J #LawAndLegislation

Parties to international arbitrations and U.S.-based discovery targets alike must navigate the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 ruling in ZF Automotive US Inc. v. Luxshare Ltd. My latest article, published by Law360 today, delves into the evolving landscape of Section 1782 discovery post-ZF Automotive, outlining current trends and future expectations. #InternationalArbitration #Section1782 #ZFvLuxshare #Law #Crossborder #Discovery #LegalTrends

Switzerland: New Swiss Motor Vehicle Ordinance: On 29 November 2023, the Swiss government enacted a new Ordinance on the Competition Law Treatment of Vertical Agreements in the Motor Vehicle Sector (referred to as the Motor Vehicle Ordinance). In December 2023, the Swiss Competition Commission (COMCO) released Explanatory Notes to accompany the new Ordinance. The new Ordinance and Explanatory Notes are scheduled to come into force on 1 January 2024, and are set to replace COMCO's current Motor Vehicle Notice and Explanatory Notes. The post Switzerland: New Swiss Motor Vehicle Ordinance appeared first on Global Compliance News. -via @bakermckenzie

Manual on Motor Vehicles Laws As amended upto 1st July, 2024 Buy Now: https://lnkd.in/gTknAn_G Stay compliant and informed with the latest legal framework surrounding motor vehicles. This manual offers a comprehensive look at laws, rules, regulations, schemes, prescribed forms, and allied acts, updated to include all amendments up to 1st July, 2024

Have a listen to one of our Industry Policy Advisors Michael McKenna as he sheds light on how consumer law affects Licensed Motor Car Traders on the latest episode of Talking Automotive. Michael discusses the instances of complaints in the automotive industry, from buyer's remorse to technical issues, post-COVID pricing, and dealers' obligations to uphold consumer rights.   #VACCInsights #automotive #consumerlaw