Podcast: Are Legal Holds Protected by Privilege? Insights from the FTC's Battle with Amazon
The FTC Takes Action Against the Amazon Prime Program
The FTC and DOJ Act Against Amazon to Protect Privacy
The Labor Law Insider: New York Amazon Employees Vote for Union - What Do We Learn?
Law Brief®: Mark Rosenberg and Richard Schoenstein Discuss Recent Experiences With Amazon Neutral Patent Evaluations
Episode 153 -- The Mighty Amazon Falls to OFAC Enforcement Sword
Subro Sense Podcast - Unpacking Product Claims Against Amazon
Amazon’s Pilot Program for Patent Disputes
The Supreme Court recently declined to review a Federal Circuit decision that could have significant implications for patent owners that rely on the Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (“APEX”) program....more
On November 18, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard oral argument on cases involving Amazon.com Inc. and SpaceX, respectively, challenging the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Board...more
On June 13, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB” or the “Board”) ability to seek injunctive relief during the pendency of an unfair labor practice proceeding. In a near...more
The Eastern District of Virginia recently dismissed a patent infringement claim, holding that the asserted claim directed to natural speech processing is patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, because it fails the Alice...more
On April 18, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case involving a former U.S. Postal Service (USPS) worker who was denied a religious accommodation to observe his sabbath. The broad implications of a...more
“The NCAA is not above the law.” Those seven words capped Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s searing concurring opinion issued in connection with Monday’s (June 21) unanimous (9-0) U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Alston v. National...more
Welcome to the second 2019 issue of Product Lines – our quarterly e-newsletter that focuses on toxic torts and products liability issues. For this edition, we are reporting on several important and timely legal issues. As...more
Summaries of Recent Precedential and Informative Appellate Opinions - Trademark Opinions - Owners of Foreign Marks May Sue Under Lanham Act Without Using Marks in the US: Belmora LLC v. Bayer Consumer Care AG,...more
On February 29, 2016, the Supreme Court declined to review a Ninth Circuit decision holding that there was no likelihood of confusion, and therefore no trademark infringement, where Amazon.com responded to consumer searches...more
Consistent with Governor Robert Bentley’s public statement last week that he hopes Amazon.com or another internet e-tailer will sue the state of Alabama regarding its position on nexus, the Alabama Department of Revenue...more
The Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) requires that employees be paid for all work and receive overtime pay for work that is part of the employee’s “principal activities” beyond 40 hours a week. However, the FLSA also states...more
The United States Supreme Court issued an interesting decision last month on whether employees who are required to undergo security screening after their work was done should be paid for that time. The Supreme Court found in...more
The employer in this case, Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc., provides staffing to Amazon.com throughout the United States. Plaintiffs Jesse Busk and Laurie Castro worked as hourly employees retrieving and packaging products...more
In a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, a unanimous court held that time spent by employees in mandatory security checks after work is not compensable, unless the screenings are "integral and indispensable" to the principal...more
The United States Supreme Court recently held in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk et al. that time spent waiting for and undergoing post-shift security checks is not compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act...more
In Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, the United States Supreme Court addressed whether an employee is “working” when undergoing a security screening because he or she is required to do so by the employer. In a...more
In Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument recently in a class action case regarding whether employees assigned by their employer to work at an Amazon warehouse must be...more
In This Issue: - Supreme Court Rejects Security Screening Time Pay - NLRB Finalizes Union Election Rule - NLRB Reverses Employers’ Ability To Ban Employee Nonwork Email Use - EEOC Challenges Employer...more
Employers across the country are breathing a sigh of relief following the December 9, 2014 unanimous ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court that time spent by warehouse workers waiting for and undergoing antitheft security...more
In a decision that will certainly benefit employers facing claims of pre-shift and post-shift off-the-clock work, on December 9, 2014, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that employees’ time spent waiting to...more
While helpful to some employers, Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk does not fundamentally change the law of compensable working time. On December 9, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that warehouse employees were not entitled to compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act for time spent waiting to pass through anti-theft security screenings after their shifts...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that an employer was not required to pay its non-exempt employees for time spent waiting to go through security screenings at the end of the workday. In Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc....more
On December 9, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk holding that employees' time spent waiting to undergo and undergoing security screenings is not...more
Last week, in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, the United States Supreme Court issued a rare unanimous opinion holding that post-shift employee security screenings were noncompensable activities under the Fair...more