AD Nauseam: The Best Podcast (Fact or Puffery?)
Law Brief®: The Theranos Trial
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - False and Misleading Advertising, Label Review
Deepfakes and Disinformation: The World of Manipulated Media
AFSA Extra Credit Podcast: Navigating Advertising During COVID-19
Podcast - Developments in FDA & DOJ Regulation and Enforcement of Manufacturer Communications
On March 21, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Thompson v. United States that a federal statute prohibiting “false” statements to banks, 18 USC § 1014, does not apply to statements that are merely misleading. Although...more
The vast majority of federal white-collar fraud enforcement actions are prosecuted under the wire, mail, or bank fraud statutes. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, and 1344. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Thompson v. United...more
Last week a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Thompson v. United States, 2025 WL 876266 (2025), holding that a statement that is literally true but allegedly misleading, is not a “false statement” under 18...more
In a unanimous decision issued on March 21, 2025, the Supreme Court in Thompson v. U.S. heightened the burden of proof for “false” statements under 18 U.S.C. § 1014, excluding “misleading” but true statements from liability...more
On March 21, the Supreme Court announced its opinion in Thompson v. United States, reversing the Seventh Circuit and holding that 18 U.S.C. § 1014's prohibition on making "any false statement" does not extend to misleading,...more
If you tell your partner that you spent $100 on a rare bobblehead for your office, when the full price was actually $1,000, have you said anything false? Literally, you did spend $100; you just spent another $900 as well....more
On November 13, 2024, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in an appeal from a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a putative class action asserting claims under the...more
The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in two cases concerning the pleading standard in securities fraud class actions....more
The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled argument for November 6, 2024 in an important case involving risk-factor disclosures of public companies. At issue is whether a company’s risk disclosures can be treated as false or...more
The Federal Circuit determined that if a company misleads consumers about the nature of a product by making false patent marking claims, it can be held liable under the Lanham Act. False marking claims under the Lanham Act...more
The Supreme Court started yesterday with 14 decisions yet to deliver and only reduced the number by two—neither of them the Trump immunity case nor the Loper case concerning the future of the agency deference doctrine of...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, that “pure omissions” made in required disclosures do not...more
The United States Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, ruled that a corporation is not liable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 for...more
A company cannot be sued by private parties under Rule 10b-5(b) for a “pure omission” but can be liable for omissions that render other statements misleading. “Pure omissions” cannot be attacked in private 10b-5(b)...more
On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court delivered an important decision on the issue of whether a failure to make disclosure required under Item 303 of Regulation S-K can support a Rule 10b-5 claim, even in the...more
On April 12, 2024, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L. P., vacating a judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that had reinstated claims...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court limited an issuer's liability for securities fraud claims based on alleged omissions in SEC filings. The Court's unanimous decision in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. et al v. Moab...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that pure silence in MD&A statements are not actionable in shareholder securities fraud cases. The case is important for issuers and shareholders alike for several reasons: -...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has now resolved the split in lower courts, discussed in our March 14, 2024 post, over whether plaintiffs may bring a securities fraud claim based solely on a corporation’s omission from public filings...more
SEC Rule 10b-5(b) makes it unlawful for issuers to make false statements or “to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made...not misleading.” In addition to ensuring the truth of statements,...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the anti-fraud provision of the Securities Exchange Act does not prohibit “pure omissions,” but only false statements or misleading half-truths. The unanimous decision in Macquarie...more
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed and vacated the Second Circuit’s decision in Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation v. Moab Partners, L.P. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion for the Court....more
After enjoying several decades of acceptance across many circuit courts, the future of the so-called “Rogers test” is uncertain. Established in the landmark Second Circuit case Rogers v. Grimaldi, Rogers is a two-step test...more
A recent Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii decision permitted climate-related claims against major petroleum and gas companies to proceed toward trial. The decision in City and County of Honolulu v. Sunoco LP allows...more
After previously finding that the Biden White House and the FBI likely violated First Amendment free speech protections for some users of online social media platforms, the Fifth Circuit expanded its ruling to find that the...more