HB Litigation News

Tag: Scientific & Medical Studies

  • Progress of Roundup Settlement in Question, Verus Reports

    Progress of Roundup Settlement in Question, Verus Reports

    By Kim Lavin

    Manager of Research Services
    Verus LLC
    klavin@verusllc.com
    609-466-0427

    Progress of Roundup Settlement in Question

    Judge Would Likely Not Have Agreed to a Stay Had He Known About the Contingency

    On August 27, plaintiffs’ counsel in the multi-district litigation involving Monsanto and its widely used weed killer Roundup, advised the court that parent company Bayer AG appeared to be going back on the settlement agreement announced in June. At that time, the company had agreed to settle about 75% of the 125,000 claims filed by plaintiffs alleging that their non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was linked to Roundup use; the settlement was for an estimated $10 billion.

    At the hearing, Judge Vince Chhabria advised that he had received confidential letters from a number of plaintiffs’ counsel with cases pending in the MDL who were concerned that Bayer AG was going back on the settlement, noting that the company had terminated settlement term sheets and refused to execute master service agreements that would finalize their settlements; Bayer conceded that there were currently no final agreements.

    Bayer did advise Judge Chhabria that about 667 of the cases currently pending in the MDL had been resolved, a figure that the judge noted was only a fraction of the 4,000 currently filed.  The judge also pointed to Bayer’s June 24 announcement of the settlement, stating that he had taken “all of that to mean the MDL is settled.”  He indicated that he would likely not have agreed to a 60-day stay of the litigation had he known that the larger settlement was contingent on his approval of a separate class action settlement for $1.25 billion, designed to resolve any future Roundup cases.  The judge then advised the parties that although he would not lift the current stay, he would not extend it, expressing concerns that it was being used by the parties to manipulate the settlement talks.

    Read more at VerusLLC.com.

    Safeguarding Against Financial Exploitation

    An on-demand CLE-eligible webinar Safeguarding Against Financial Exploitation   America’s senior population is growing. Nearly one in five U.S. residents will be 65 or older in 2030. Which means the average age of U.S. investors is climbing too. With that comes the risk that they will be exploited by people with access – or gain access through nefarious methods – to their investment portfolio. Seniors and vulnerable persons lose billions of dollars each year. Remarkably, 90% of the people to take advantage of senior investors are members of their own family. Attorneys who represent senior clients need to know the signs of vulnerability, red flags that their clients are being exploited, what laws apply, and rules lawyers must follow in these matters.   Questions our speakers answer: What is senior / vulnerable investor exploitation?   Who is protected by state and federal laws?   How prevalent is senior financial exploitation? What do the numbers tell us?  What is the pace of financial abuse SAR filings by securities firms?  What are the most popular scams?   What is diminished capacity?  What are the red flags indicating possible exploitation?  What are the laws, rules, and regulations governing law firms?  What are some best practices for law firms?  How can firms best protect their senior clients?   On Demand CLE Webinar What You Get PowerPoint and supplemental materials. Complete recording for later review. Answers to your questions via email. Invitation to contact speakers. 1.5 CLE credits (for licensed attorneys). CLE assistance.* *Subject to state bar rules. For licensed attorneys.  Register Meet the Speakers Joseph Calabrese Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. A 1991 Graduate of St. John’s University Law School, Mr. Calabrese brings 30 years of practice and 18 years of Securities Litigation/Regulatory experience to his role as principal in the New York office of  Bressler, Amery & Ross’s Financial Institutions Group. He began his career as a Wall Street litigator as an associate general counsel for Citigroup’s Smith Barney and […]

    Lien Resolution: Government & Private Plans Get Aggressive (Against Attorneys)

    Includes Nearly 75 minutes of insights from experienced professionals. CLE credit: 1+ (subject to bar rules). For CLE questions: CLE@LitigationConference.com The complete Power Point presentation. Continued access to the complete recording for later use. Answers to your questions via email to the presenters or write to HB and we will be sure to contact the speakers. What can you do to settle personal injury suits cleanly and avoid costly litigation and penalties? What recent cases can inform you about protecting your settlements and, as attorneys, yourselves, from post-settlement federal lawsuits? How can your firm set itself up to meet government expectations? What role might experts play in navigating these pitfalls? Medicare Advantage (42 USC § 1395w-22) Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (FMCRA) (42 USC § 2651) Armed Forces Act (10 USC §1095) Veterans’ Benefits (38 USC §1729) Third-Party Collection Rules (32 CFR 537.24; 38 CFR 17.101, etc.) Set-Asides under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (42 USC § 1395y(b)(2)] On Demand Registration Lien Resolution Government & Private Plans Get Aggressive (Against Attorneys!) On Demand | Recorded September 2020 It is increasingly common these days. Personal injury attorneys settle a case, only to find themselves sued by a U.S. Attorney for failing to reimburse Medicare for conditional payments as required by the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. In some cases the attorney may be required to pay fines in addition to the reimbursements and interest, a costly proposition. Are you up to speed on issues surrounding Medicare Advantage, TRICARE, veterans’ claims, and Medicare set-asides? Join nationally recognized healthcare lien and resolution expert Franklin P. Solomon and go-to lien resolution provider Brett Newman as they offer a practical, in-depth CLE presentation. Franklin P. Solomon, Esq. Attorney & Founder, Solomon Law Firm  A graduate of Rutgers University School of Law at Camden, Franklin Solomon is based in Cherry Hill, NJ, with a practice focused on evaluation, litigation and resolution of healthcare “liens” and reimbursement claims. Mr. Solomon represents personal injury victims and their attorneys […]

    Telepsychiatry: Mitigating the Risks

    REGISTER Registration Includes Nearly 90 minutes of insights from experienced professionals. CLE credit: 1+ (subject to bar rules). For CLE questions: CLE@LitigationConference.com The complete Power Point presentation. Continued access to the complete recording for later use. Answers to your questions via email to the presenters or write to HB and we will be sure to contact the speakers. Understand the risks associated with telepsychiatry and how to manage them.  Telemedicine has emerged as an important solution for healthcare in general and psychiatric medicine specifically during the current global pandemic. Remote access for sub-practices including addiction counseling have been commonly used. Our panel of psychiatric professionals who have served as expert witnesses and attorneys who counsel and represent physicians have prepared a 90-minute session to share insights with attorneys, physicians, healthcare providers, risk professionals, and more. Agenda Examining procedures and best practices that exist for ensuring confidentiality in a telemedicine practice How do you draft a telepsychiatric consent form? What is the emerging standard of care for telemedicine? Will the standard of care for telemedicine become a national standard? (Should it?) Review the case law addressing telemedicine or telepsychiatry How do the HIPAA regulations and HITECH privacy laws impact telemedicine? How have the HIPAA regulations and HITECH privacy laws been relaxed during the pandemic? Will the relaxed HIPAA and HITECH regulations impacting telemedicine continue past the pandemic? Which technical platforms are preferred? Which ones to avoid? Panelists Mark Levy, M.D., Medical Director at fpamed David Kan, M.D., UCSF Psychiatry Department and the California Society for Substance Abuse Medicine Ayesha Ashai, M.D., associated with fpamed Stephen M. Fatum, J.D., Partner, Barnes & Thornburg LLP Angela W. Russell, J.D., Partner, Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP Meet our physician and attorney panelists. Mark Levy MD Medical Director fpamed Dr. Levy is a graduate of Columbia College (A.B. 1967) and the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons (M.D. 1971) in New York. He is a Physician […]

    The Commercial Drone Industry: Privacy, Security, Threats, and Mitigation of Risk

    HB presents a CLE-eligible webinar Now on-demand at the West LegalEdcenter THE COMMERCIAL DRONE INDUSTRY Privacy, Security, Threats, and Mitigation of Risk Drones have become an increasingly valuable tool for businesses of all types and sizes. Drones are already being used in many applications, but more will certainly arise as the technology advances. This means that certain risks, like cyber threats, will also continue to present themselves. Protecting the transmission and storage of data collected through drones is critical. Unfortunately, security usually comes as an afterthought. The drone industry is part of the aviation industry, which, based on its knowledge, keeps safety as a number one concern. Part of that safety is having proper protection for your systems, including security as a fundamental design principle. Take this webinar to gain insights on the topics listed below, and shared by an attorney who practices on the cutting-edge of this evolving technology. Topics: Defining drones. Current and future applications. FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. FAA Part 107 Regulations and waivers. Resources, e.g. the FAA Drone Zone and LAANC Portal. Penalties for violations. Privacy implications. Drones as weapons. Vulnerability to cyber attacks. Take it now! What you get: 1+ CLE credits (subject to bar rules). Insights from an experienced professional who specializes in this area of the law. The complete PowerPoint presentation. Continued access to the complete recording for later use. Answers to your questions. Fee: No additional charge to subscribers to the West LegalEdcenter. Non-subscribers may take the course for $170. Meet the Speaker Kathryn Rattigan Robinson & Cole LLP Kathryn Rattigan is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation Group and Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Team. She advises clients on data privacy and security, cybersecurity, and compliance with related state and federal laws. She assists clients in assessing risks related to technology and software contracts, as well as with compliance-related issues with outsourcing and […]

    The Intersection of Privacy and Antitrust Webinar Now Available On-Demand on the West LegalEdcenter

    Available as part of your subscription to The Thomson Reuters West LegalEdcenter®. Don’t subscribe to the West LegalEdcenter? This webinar is still available directly from HB. Take it now! Questions for speakers Questions@LitigationConferences.com CLE questions CLE@LitigationConferences.com Check out the MoginRubin blog for more insights on antitrust and privacy law. What attorneys and companies need to know about the increasing interplay between these critical areas of the law.  Highly publicized cases and investigations in the U.S. and Europe of big technology, e-commerce, and social media companies demonstrate how anti-competition laws are being used to scrutinize and challenge not only how these corporations conduct themselves in the marketplace, but the very core of their colossal success: the mass collection and utilization of user data. Are the privacy and antitrust worlds beginning to cross over? Or do they simply run parallel while addressing entirely different types of conduct? Whatever the answer, data is the raw material that drives the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon, so how it is handled is a critical question when counseling clients on mergers and acquisitions. Moderator Daniel J.  Mogin | Managing Partner, MoginRubin LLP Speakers Jennifer M. Oliver, CIPP/US | Partner, MoginRubin LLP Thomas N. Dahdouh | Director, Western Region, Federal Trade Commission Franklin M. Rubinstein | Partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Randi W. Singer, CIPP/US, CIPT | Partner, Weil, Gotshal & Manges Contributor Dina Srinivasan | Independent Researcher & Author of The Antitrust Case Against Facebook Dina was unable to present but we thank her for her content contributions.  Agenda Who should regulate privacy violations in the U.S.? Which antitrust issues implicate privacy concerns? What role does machine learning play on the competitive landscape? What is big data really? How is it different from “data”? What are the elements of effective merger reviews? What are the appropriate remedies? What are “notice-and-choice” versus “harms-based” approaches? Plus answers to your questions. Send them to Questions@LitigationConferences.com.

  • PFOA: Science & Litigation | 11/15/2018

    [one-third-first]

    DATE: Nov. 15, 2018

    TIME: 2 p.m. EDT; 1 p.m. CDT; 12 p.m. MDT; 11 a.m. PDT

    PLACE: Your computer or mobile device

    PRICE: $197* per dial-in site
    *Price is good through Oct. 31. After that it’s $247.

    GROUPS ARE GOOD: Registering qualifies you to multiple attendees at your location.

    CLE: 1 credit
    Please send CLE questions to
    CLE@LitigationConferences.com

    speakers

    Michael Dourson, Ph.D., DABT, FATS, FSRA
    Director of Science
    Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA)

    Register now and get:

    • Access for multiple colleagues at your location.

    • Practical insights from a board-certified toxicologist.

    • A through and informative PowerPoint presentation for later reference.

    • Answers to your questions via live chat.

    • CLE credit.

    And more!

    [/one-third-first] [two-thirds]

    PFOA Toxicology: What’s a Safe Level for the Environment?

    What toxic tort and environmental attorneys need to know about this ubiquitous compound. 

    Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) has been described as more toxic than methyl mercury. Yet not all organizations tasked with developing safe-dose levels agree on the best approach for PFOA, resulting in recommended levels that are more than 100-times apart.

    Differences in these recommended safe-dose levels result in cleanup costs that vary by billions of dollars.

    Background

    Environmental contamination with PFOA has been known for some time. In the early 2000s safe doses in drinking water were considered to be in the range of 30-to-50 parts per billion.  Recent safe-dose assessments by EPA, ATSDR and several states have significantly lowered these safe doses to parts-per-trillion measurements.

    PFOA, also known as C8, is used to make Teflon® and similar chemicals known as fluorotelomers. According to the American Cancer Society, PFOA is “burned off during the [manufacturing] process and is not present in significant amounts in the final products.”

    However, the American Cancer Society says, “PFOA has the potential to be a health concern because it can stay in the environment and in the human body for long periods of time. Studies have found that it is present worldwide at very low levels in just about everyone’s blood. Higher blood levels have been found in community residents where local water supplies have been contaminated by PFOA. People exposed to PFOA in the workplace can have levels many times higher.

    “PFOA and some similar compounds can be found at low levels in some foods, drinking water, and in household dust. Although PFOA levels in drinking water are usually low, they can be higher in certain areas, such as near chemical plants that use PFOA.

    “People can also be exposed to PFOA from ski wax or from fabrics and carpeting that have been treated to be stain resistant. Non-stick cookware is not a significant source of PFOA exposure.”

    The underlying toxicity data has not changed that much. What differs is our understanding of the differences between experiments on animals and humans in how PFOA is excreted from the body. Recently it has been suggested that the federal approach to this safe dose assessment has not followed its own risk assessment guidelines. If true, this lack of adherence to guidelines calls into question whether the significantly lower safe doses are appropriate. If these much lower levels are not appropriate, then clean up standards to these levels may be overly costly.

    Earlier this year, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the availability of the Draft Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyls for review and comment. All toxicological profiles issued as “Drafts for Public Comment” represent ATSDR’s best efforts to provide important toxicological information on priority hazardous substances. You can see the many comments received at the ATSDR website. 

    Is PFOA really more toxic than methyl mercury?

    Do we really need to spend billions of dollars in its clean up?

    How can it be that these safe doses vary so widely?

    Attendees of this webinar will learn the nuances of safe dose assessment from a board-certified toxicologist, including:

    — A thorough background on the toxicology of PFOA.

    — A practical overview of animal vs human studies.

    — An understanding of the latest federal approach to estimating the safe dose of PFOA.

    — A review of the underlying risk assessment guidelines.

    — An explanation of how more typical approaches likely yield higher safe-dose levels and less costly cleanups.

    And more!

    speaker

    Dr. Michael Dourson is a board-certified toxicologist serving as the Director of Science. Most recently, he was Senior Advisor in the Office of the Administrator at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Prior to this position, Dr. Dourson was a Professor in the Risk Science Center at the University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine and worked at TERA and EPA. He was awarded the Arnold J. Lehman award from the Society of Toxicology, the International Achievement Award by the International Society of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, and 4 bronze medals from the EPA. He has been elected as a Fellow of the Academy of Toxicological Sciences and as a Fellow for the Society for Risk Analysis. He has co-published more than 150 papers on risk assessment methods or chemical-specific analyses, and co-authored well over 100 government risk assessment documents, many of them risk assessment guidance texts. He has made over 150 invited presentations to a variety of organizations, and has chaired over 150 sessions at scientific meetings and independent peer reviews. He has been elected to multiple officer positions in the American Board of Toxicology (including its President), the Society of Toxicology (including the President of 3 specialty sections), the Society for Risk Analysis (including its Secretary), and is currently the President of the Toxicology Education Foundation, a nonprofit organization with a vision to help the public understand the essentials of toxicology. In addition to numerous appointments on government panels, such as EPA’s Science Advisory Board, he is a current member on the editorial board of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology and Human and Experimental Toxicology.

    REGISTER NOW

    [/two-thirds]