October 1, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

Storytelling is the most effective form of persuasion. Neither law schools nor the practice of law provide much, if any, training on how to develop likely the most important skill an advocate must possess: the ability to tell and present a persuasive story that resonates and convinces the audience on an intellectual and emotional level. Good storytelling is good advocacy.

In this briefing, David Henry Dolkas, a partner with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, and the author of Managing Complex IP Litigation will cover:

• The five reasons that most presentations are ineffective and fail to resonate and convince.
• How to address and answer the “Key Questions” presented by your complex case.
• How to take the answers to the Key Questions and apply principles of screen writing and narrative to build the story of your complex case.
• How to tell a story that will appeal to the emotional intelligence of your audience.
• How to emphasize the benefits, rather than the features, of the facts that make up the story of your complex case.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

September 30, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

Fourteen years ago, the Northern District of California started an experiment: a special set of local rules to govern pretrial proceedings in patent cases. If imitation is a sign of success, then the experiment was a great success: Thirty one districts around the country have now adopted variants of the Northern District’s Patent Local Rules, and judges in other jurisdictions, such as the Central District of California, have adopted standing orders adopting the scheduling and disclosure requirements of the Patent Local Rules for their courtroom or regularly incorporate those requirements into Rule 16 scheduling orders.

Litigating under the rules can be challenging, with most courts adopting a strict approach to pre-trial disclosures that is very different from the way other civil disputes are handled under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to recognize these differences and to plan ahead for complying with the rules can result in a litigant being precluded from making important substantive arguments.

Please join the chair of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP’s IP litigation group, Michael M. Carlson as he discusses:

• The potential pitfalls of practicing under Patent Local Rules
• The steps that must be taken to prepare for and comply with Patent Local Rules
• The major variations in the terms of the Patent Local Rules as adopted among the districts

The discussion will be applicable to those litigating patent cases in any district that has adopted the rules or in front of any judge who has implemented them through standing or scheduling orders.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

September 23, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

In the context of private M&A transactions, where do the boundaries exist between proper negotiation and fraudulent conduct? A buyer may believe that the seller has a duty to disclose negative facts about the company, while the seller may believe that the buyer has the responsibility to ask the right questions and conduct proper due diligence to satisfy itself as to the condition of the company. Where contractual disclaimers are at play, buyers and sellers can often be at odds on who bears the ultimate risk of reliance on inaccurate information. In such cases, common law fraud may be the final arbiter of which party is ultimately deemed at fault for dashed expectations following a private company acquisition. This One-Hour Briefing will examine how common law fraud principles can govern the proper scope of seller and buyer responsibilities when due diligence and contractual protections fall short.

Michael M. Farhang of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP will address the following topics:

• What are the common law fraud standards in two representative jurisdictions, New York and California, as applied to buyer and seller conduct in private M&A transactions?
• What are the effects of choice-of-law provisions in private M&A agreements?
• What impact does a contractual disclaimer have on a buyer’s reliance on alleged representations or omissions by the seller regarding the target company?
• How do courts view the quality of a buyer’s due diligence when evaluating claims of fraud in the M&A context?
• What are some of the policy considerations relevant to the boundaries of responsibility between sellers and buyers in the M&A context?

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

September 18, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

In 2012, President Obama vetoed the acquisition of windfarms in Oregon by Ralls Corporation, an American company owned and controlled by two senior officials of the Sany Group, a Chinese corporation, based on their proximity to a sensitive military installation. Ralls subsequently challenged the action and the District Court dismissed the complaint. On July 15, 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a landmark decision in Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States No. 1:12cv-01513) (July 15, 2014), reversing the District Court’s decision. The Circuit Court held that constitutional due process had been denied because Ralls was not given notice of the factual basis for the veto or given an opportunity to rebut the evidence.

This one-hour briefing will be hosted by Christopher R. Brewster and Anne W. Salladin, Special Counsel at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP’s Washington-based National Security/CFIUS/Compliance practice. These panelists regularly represent foreign companies before CFIUS. Mr. Brewster has advised clients on CFIUS filings since passage of the Exon-Florio Amendment in 1988, including some of the largest matters considered by the Committee; Ms. Salladin is a nearly twenty year veteran of the US Department of the Treasury, the chair of CFIUS, where she provided legal advice to CFIUS and participated in the review and investigation of over 500 CFIUS cases.

The panelists will discuss the following:

• A review of the decision
• If upheld, implications of the decision for foreign investment in the USA
• If upheld, implications for CFIUS procedures and
• If upheld, implications for course and structure of deals that may affect national security

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

September 11, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

A multinational might proclaim “zero tolerance” for discrimination and harassment across its U.S. operations. But does it ignore sex harassment in its Dubai office? Does it tolerate mandatory retirement in its Berlin facility? And does it excuse blatant race and gender discrimination at its Tokyo subsidiary as “cultural differences”?

Equal employment opportunity compliance initiatives evolved in domestic American HR, and we Americans think of our U.S.-style EEO initiatives as world-leading. These days, U.S.-based multinationals push to align, across national borders, their human resources “offerings” that promote workplace equality?their HR policies, code of conduct provisions, training modules, and internal compliance audits. But directly exporting a homegrown American EEO initiative does not work. Fighting discrimination and harassment, and promoting diversity, across borders requires subtlety, nuance, strategy and finesse. Americans may even need to relax their fierce “zero tolerance” stance to account for different discrimination and harassment laws and attitudes overseas. For that matter, in many countries diversity is less of an imperative, demographically.

This session offers U.S. multinationals a toolkit for expanding and localizing U.S.-style EEO initiatives to work across worldwide operations. How can we adapt American-style EEO strategies and policies for global compliance initiatives? How can we impose rules against workplace discrimination and harassment abroad? How can we champion diversity internationally?

Please join Donald C. Dowling, Jr. of White & Case LLP for a discussion on the following topics:

• combating workplace discrimination across borders
• the special challenge of global age discrimination compliance
• the special challenge of global pay discrimination compliance
• combating workplace harassment across borders
• promoting workplace diversity across borders

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

September 4, 2014, 1:oop.m. – 2:00p.m. (E.D.T.)

In just one hour, this briefing will provide you with a summary of federal candidate and PAC campaign law, as regulated by the Federal Election Campaign Act and administered by the Federal Election Commission’s Regulations and Disclosure Rules.

Please join Jan Witold Baran of Wiley Rein LLP, Kenneth A. Gross of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Chip Nielsen of Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP for a discussion addressing:

• Contribution definitions, limits, and prohibitions
• Contributions and expenditures after the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases
• Disclosure and political action committees
• Tax laws for political organizations and 501(c)(4)s
• Resource materials provided by the FEC and other experts

This One-Hour Briefing is offered as a primer for the two-day program Corporate Political Activities 2014: Complying with Campaign Finance, Lobbying and Ethics Laws on September 11-12, 2014 at The Ritz Carlton in Washington, D.C., and is presented by the program co-chairs. Register for the live two-day program and receive complimentary access to this preparatory briefing.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

August 14, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

The law governing the state income taxation of trusts is rapidly evolving. Recent cases have successfully challenged the constitutional validity of the taxation of trusts in a variety of states. Trustees, beneficiaries and their advisors need to stay current with respect to these important tax law changes. Join expert faculty in this timely program as they examine the significance of the recent court decisions and provide practical guidance regarding the state income taxation of trusts.

Topics include:

• A review of the general state law landscape regarding the taxation of trusts.
• A review of the tax haven states.
• Analysis regarding state tax statutes that may be vulnerable to a constitutional challenge.
• Review three recent taxpayer favorable cases addressing state taxation of trusts.
• Review New York’s recent tax law changes applicable to trusts.
• Identify the types of trusts that might benefit from a change of situs.
• Review the mechanics of removing a trust from a taxing state.
• Discuss tax return filing obligations and address ongoing tax compliance.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!