L-R: Ryan Glasgow, Christopher Pardo and Katherine Sandberg of Hunton Andrews Kurth. Courtesy photos Introduction
In August of this year, a Texas federal court blocked the Federal Trade Commission's Noncompete Rule (16 C.F.R. Section 910.1-6) (Final Rule) on a nationwide basis for all employers. The Final Rule would have banned nearly all noncompetes for most types of workers and was set to go into effect on Sept. 4, 2024. Despite this favorable ruling, the future of the Final Rule is uncertain because of ongoing litigation in other jurisdictions. The Circuit Courts of Appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately be asked to weigh in, and the outcome of the upcoming election in November may also have an impact on the Final Rule's fate.FTC Rule Banning Noncompetes Set Aside on Nationwide Basis by Federal Court
"The court also determined that the Final Rule was overbroad," write Ryan Glasgow, Christopher Pardo and Katherine Sandberg of Hunton Andrews Kurth.
September 23, 2024 at 06:00 PM
7 minute read
L-R: Ryan Glasgow, Christopher Pardo and Katherine Sandberg of Hunton Andrews Kurth. Courtesy photos
Introduction
In August of this year, a Texas federal court blocked the Federal Trade Commission's Noncompete Rule (16 C.F.R. Section 910.1-6) (Final Rule) on a nationwide basis for all employers. The Final Rule would have banned nearly all noncompetes for most types of workers and was set to go into effect on Sept. 4, 2024. Despite this favorable ruling, the future of the Final Rule is uncertain because of ongoing litigation in other jurisdictions. The Circuit Courts of Appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately be asked to weigh in, and the outcome of the upcoming election in November may also have an impact on the Final Rule's fate.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
In Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute read
California’s Workplace Violence Laws: Protecting Victims’ Rights in the Workplace
6 minute read
Employers Scramble to Get Immigration Records in Order Ahead of Trump Crackdown
6 minute read
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 2Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 3Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
- 4Husch Blackwell, Foley Among Law Firms Opening Southeast Offices This Year
- 5In Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
