COVID-19 and the Courtroom with Alison Besunder
Category: Emerging Litigation & Risk
-
European Union’s Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield
European Union’s Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield
The Court of Justice for the European Union has invalidated the EU-US Privacy Shield as an approved mechanism for transferring personal data from the European Union to the United States. The Privacy Shield had been in place since October 2015, and enabled U.S. companies to more easily receive personal data from EU entities. The decision by the court “leaves many companies scrambling to implement alternative mechanisms to safeguard personal data transfers to the U.S.,” says Sten-Erik Hoidal of Frederikson & Byron, P.A. With the invalidation of the privacy shield, companies are essentially left to decide on their own how data will be lawfully transferred. Attorneys from Perkins Coie recommend companies “consider amending any data processing addenda (DPAs) which companies have signed with vendors or customers to incorporate the EU Standard Contract Clauses.” Moving forward, U.S. and European companies will now attempt to create a new deal that complies with the privacy standards for transferring digital information. The first large company to weigh in on the decision, Microsoft tells customers that they “can continue to use Microsoft services in full compliance with European law” and that the ruling “does not change the data flows of our services to Consumers.”
Photo by Tabrez Syed on Unsplash
-
$3M Transferred in Fraud Scheme, Law Firm Gets Sued, Says It Followed Client Instructions
$3M Transferred in Fraud Scheme, Law Firm Sued, Says It Followed Client Instructions
Two related foundations hired a big law firm to sell stock and execute a merger via wire transfer. Cyber fraudsters had other ideas. Posing as stock seller, and intercepting a verification email, the perpetrators grabbed $3.1 million. The foundations sued the firm in state court in Utah, claiming the firm should have red-flagged certain inconsistencies and known it was being duped. The firm should also have picked up the phone to verify the source of the fraudulent emails and documents. Not so fast, the firm maintains. The plaintiff was not a client and it was only acting on wiring instructions sent via the plaintiff’s email system and provided the instructions to the paying agent. The money was sent to the account of an alleged furniture company in Hong Kong. Sorenson, et al. v. Continental Stock Transfer, Tassel Parent, and Holland & Knight, 3rd. Jud. Dist. Ct., Salt Lake Co., Utah.
-
Healthcare Industry Antitrust Measures Advance as Pandemic Pressures Persist
Healthcare Industry Antitrust Measures Advance as Pandemic Pressures Persist
Did consolidation help frustrate U.S. COVID-19 preparedness?
Clearly antitrust enforcers must consider external circumstances like the COVID-19 crisis when making enforcement decisions, and the agencies have bene able to pivot to respond to this crisis remarkably quickly. It is important, however, to also consider whether and how these emergency COVID-19 collaborations will unwind once the crisis has subsided. Collaborating competitors will have already shared critical information and resources, and that momentum can be difficult to halt.
Jennifer M. Oliver, Partner, MoginRubin LLP
Jennifer M. Oliver
Partner
MoginRubin LLP
-
Tech’s Big Four Will Testify Before Antitrust Subcommittee
Four Technology Giants’ CEOs Will Testify Before Congress in On-going Antitrust Investigation
Executives from Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google will appear (either virtually, as they are permitted to, or in person) before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee on July 27, 2020. According to its press release, the Subcommittee has been scrutinizing the companies’ dominance in their respective digital spheres and the “adequacy of existing antitrust laws and enforcement,” since June 2019.
The hearing will enable legislators to question the executives about possible antitrust abuses, which have been the focus of many federal, state, and foreign regulatory inquiries. For example, Representatives may inquire about Amazon’s treatment of third-party merchants who sell products on its e-commerce platform, Google’s highly profitable ad business, Apple’s App Store terms that infringe on the rights of third-party app developers, and Facebook’s leverage of previously acquired companies to solidify its social media dominance, according to a July 1, 2020 New York Times article by David McCabe. The hearing may serve as the crowning piece of the Subcommittee’s antitrust probe. As the Subcommittee’s press release stated, the CEOs’ “forthcoming” testimony is “essential” to completion of the investigation.
-
Attorney General Ferguson of Washington Sues State’s Top Opioid Distributers
“We are woefully under-resourced when it comes to treatment. The people who are responsible for this epidemic should being paying for it. We are going to hold these companies accountable and get more money into our communities for treatment.” –Washington AG Bob Ferguson
The three largest distributors of prescription opioids in Washington State are being sued by Attorney General Bob Ferguson for fueling the state’s opioid epidemic. Detailed in Ferguson’s King County lawsuit are the billions of dollars made from these suspicious shipments of over 2 billion pills of unregulated oxycodone, fentanyl, hydrocodone and other opioids.
“Prescriptions and sales of opioids in Washington skyrocketed more than 500 percent between 1997 and 2011. In 2011, at the peak of overall sales in Washington, more than 112 million daily doses of all prescription opioids were dispensed in the state — enough for a 16-day supply for every woman, man and child in Washington,” according to the AG’s announcement.
“In 2014 McKesson, Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen shipped enough opioids to Pend Orielle County to supply every single resident with dozens of pills. In 2009, McKesson alone supplied enough for dozens of pills for every resident of the county. The specific shipment numbers are currently under seal.”
The accused distributors are in the top 15 Fortune 500 list based on 2017 revenue. In addition to the lawsuit, the distributors owe millions of dollars in fines, and must surrender the profits, the state maintains. “The surrendered profits will be used to remediate the effects of the opioid epidemic, possibly funding treatment, education and more.”
In September of 2017, Ferguson sued one of the nation’s largest opioid manufacturers, Purdue Pharma, accusing the OxyContin maker of “fueling the state’s opioid epidemic by embarking on a massive deceptive marketing campaign and convincing doctors and the public that their drugs are effective for treating chronic pain and have a low risk of addiction, contrary to overwhelming evidence.” In April 2018 a King County judge denied Purdue’s attempt to dismiss Ferguson’s lawsuit. State medical boards have since implemented opioid prescription limits. Read the Washington State Attorney General’s Press Release here.