On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that the standard for establishing a Title VII claim is the same for all individuals, regardless of whether they belong to a majority or minority group. In doing so, the Court rejected the application of the “background circumstances” rule, which had previously required members of a majority group to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII cases.
We have previously posted on some of the recent legal issues with social casino sweepstakes. See Social Casino Sweepstakes Model is Under Fire – What Game Companies, Payment Processors and App Stores Need to Know. Various states have taken action to shut down these apps in their states. The NY AG, working with the New York State Gaming Commission, allegedly identified 26 online platforms offering players slots, table games, and sports betting using virtual coins that could be exchanged for cash and prizes. On June 6, the NY AG announced that it has stopped online sweepstakes casinos operating in New York. This action follows cease and desist letters to operators dating back to March 7, 2025.
Continue Reading NY AG Seeks to Shut Down Sweepstakes Casinos in NY
Congress is weighing a sweeping proposal that could significantly reshape how artificial intelligence (AI) is regulated across the United States. At the end of May, the United States House of Representatives passed, by a vote of 215-214, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation bill with a provision imposing a 10-year moratorium on the enforcement of most state and local laws that target AI systems. If enacted, OBBBA would pause the enforcement of existing state AI laws and regulations and take precedence over emerging AI legislation in state legislatures across the country.
Amendments to California’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL) will take effect on July 1, 2025. Enacted in September 2024 through Assembly Bill No. 2863, the amendments expand disclosure, consent, and cancellation obligations for businesses offering subscription or continuous service plans to California consumers.
Continue Reading California’s “Auto Renewal Law” Takes Effect on July 1
On April 7, the FDIC and the Maryland Office of Financial Regulation terminated two consent orders against a regional bank headquartered in Maryland. The termination concludes joint federal and state enforcement actions that required the bank to remediate deficiencies in its anti-money laundering (AML) program, interest rate risk management, and consumer protection practices.
Continue Reading FDIC and Maryland End Joint Consent Orders Against Regional Bank
On June 2, the California State Assembly unanimously passed Assembly Bill 1180, which now moves to the California Senate for consideration. The bill would require the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) to adopt regulations permitting payments required under the California Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL) to be made using digital assets. If enacted, the law would take effect on July 1, 2026.
Continue Reading California Assembly Advances Bill to Permit Crypto Payments under DFAL
On May 30, the CFPB and a national pawn store operator filed a joint status report in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas announcing that they have reached an agreement to resolve a 2021 Bureau lawsuit alleging violations of the Military Lending Act (MLA) and a 2013 CFPB consent order. The suit alleged that the pawn store operator and its subsidiary issued thousands of high-interest loans to active-duty servicemembers and their families in violation of federal law.
Continue Reading CFPB and Pawn Store Operator to Settle MLA Suit
On April 30, the FTC filed a stipulated order for a permanent injunctive relief and a monetary judgment against a Georgia-based debt collection company and its owner, which the court granted on May 9, to resolve allegations that the company used false claims, threats, and harassment to collect more than $7.6 million in bogus debts.
Continue Reading FTC Permanently Bans Debt Collector for UDAP and FDCPA Violations
Since our last coverage of “headless PAGA lawsuits”—i.e., lawsuits in which a plaintiff disavows his individual PAGA claim and opts to pursue the claim only on behalf of others—significant developments have further complicated the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) landscape. In Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., 107 Cal.App.5th 1001 (2024), the California Court of Appeal (Second District) rejected the so-called “headless” PAGA theory and held that every PAGA action must include both an individual and a non-individual claim even if the plaintiff disavows their own claim, thereby preventing plaintiffs from using this strategy to avoid arbitration. A conflicting decision was issued by another appellate court (the Fourth District) in Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation Servs. LTD., LLC, 109 Cal.App.5th 69 (2025), reh’g denied (Mar. 19, 2025). This disagreement between the two appellate decisions has led to considerable uncertainty for litigants facing pre-June 2024 PAGA lawsuits, with the California Supreme Court now stepping in to provide much needed guidance.
Continue Reading Will the California Supreme Court Put the Heads Back on Headless PAGA Suits?
In Ezrasons, Inc. v. Rudd, 2025 NY Slip Op. 03008, 2025 N.Y. LEXIS 717 (N.Y. May 20, 2025), the New York Court of Appeals reaffirmed the fundamental and controlling nature of the internal affairs doctrine as it relates to the choice of law regarding corporate governance disputes. Specifically, the Court held that in enacting Sections 626(a) and 1319(a)(2) of New York’s Business Corporation Law (“BCL”), the New York legislature did not clearly manifest an intent to displace the long-settled doctrine as it applies to shareholder derivative standing with respect to corporations formed under the laws of another jurisdiction. This decision provides further assurance to foreign corporations that New York courts will enforce the substantive law of the place of incorporation for litigation involving the corporation’s internal affairs.
A federal judge in D.C. recently ruled in favor of the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (“HRSA”), an administrative agency under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), by finding that drug manufacturers must obtain pre-approval from HRSA before implementing rebate models under the 340B Program. Specifically, U.S. District Judge Friedrich (“Friedrich”) found that HHS and HRSA did not exceed their authority when they required Eli Lilly & Co., Bristol Myers Squibb Co., Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. (“Novartis”) and Kalderos Inc., a health care tech company (together, the “Companies”) to seek pre-approval of the rebate plans they offered.[i]
This Federal Circuit Opinion[1] analyzes invalidity based on anticipation and obviousness, more specifically based on implicit claim construction of the claim limitation and inherent disclosures.
Continue Reading Undetectable Amount of Magnification IS Magnification
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on May 22, 2025 by a narrow vote of 215-214. OBBBA includes a new U.S. tax provision that could significantly increase taxes on foreign companies and investors—especially those from countries like France that have implemented digital services taxes or other similar measures. The new bill introduces a new section to the U.S. Internal Revenue Code Section 899.
On Tuesday May 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge for the District of Oregon, Michael H. Simon issued a decision in Casala LLC, d/b/a Bubble’s Hash and Rec Rehab Consulting LLC, d/b/a Ascend Dispensary v. Tina Kotek, in her official capacity as Governor of the State of Oregon, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-244-SI (D.Or. May 20, 2025), striking down Oregon’s United for Cannabis Workers Act and holding that the law is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) in violation of the Supremacy Clause and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
On Thursday, May 22, 2025, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a budget reconciliation bill introduced by House Republicans, by a 215-214 vote. The bill extends key provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, currently set to expire at the end of 2025, and allocates additional funding for defense and other federal priorities. It also includes reductions in government spending and revised eligibility requirements for several federal aid programs.
In a significant shift in international policy, the United States, European Union, and United Kingdom have each taken steps to ease sanctions on Syria, aiming to support the country’s reconstruction and political transition following the fall of the Assad regime.