AttorneysEd Center

Jeffrey Fowler, a partner at O’Melveny & Myers LLP and one of the country’s few full-time e-discovery litigators, covers recent developments in the legal duty to preserve evidence, including proposed new amendments to the Federal Rules and recent sanctions cases. He also provides practical tips for how to plan, execute and defend an effective preservation strategy.

Tom Mason of Zuckerman Spaeder addresses the lawyer’s duty of confidentiality under the ABA Model Rules and various state Rules. Topics include: how and when the duty is triggered; when the obligation ends; what conduct is covered by the obligation of confidentiality; to whom the duty of confidentiality is owed and what type of information is covered; how the ethics rules governing confidentiality relate to the attorney-client privilege; and a review of those exceptions or instances where information covered by the confidentiality rules may be revealed. Our presenter covers scenarios where a lawyer reveals confidential information with client consent, to collect a fee, to address criminal or fraudulent conduct by the client, to comply with court order and other law, and to defend against allegations against the lawyer.

Although the general obligation to preserve documents and potential penalties for spoliation are clear, the scope of the required preservation is often unclear. As a result, a company that must decide how broadly to preserve often ends up going beyond its obligations, which can result in great expense and inconvenience. In this program of particular interest to in-house and corporate counsel, Carmen McLean, a partner at Jones Day, explores ways to minimize both over-preservation and exposure to spoliation allegations.

While employers want to be able to hire the best and most qualified to staff every position, the myriad equal employment opportunity laws often intervene to roadblock these efforts. The enforcement priorities of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) are making these hiring decisions increasingly difficult for employers. For example, the EEOC recently issued new guidance for conducting criminal background checks during the hiring process that severely limit how and when employers can rely on criminal arrest and conviction records in making hiring and other employment decision. Other neutral criteria garnering a hard look by the EEOC include credit histories and employment status. In this program, especially for in-house and employment lawyers, Jon Hyman provides valuable insights to help identify and avoid the various risks that come with one of the EEOC’s highest enforcement priorities—systemic discrimination.

In October of 2012, the USPTO issued a notice of proposed rule-making proposing to replace the current USPTO ethics rules, which are based on the ABA Model Code, with a version of the ABA Model Rules. Join Michael Kasdan for a discussion of the differences between the newly proposed rules and the present regime as well as other ethical issues pertaining to practice before the USPTO.

Transactional attorneys have their litigation colleagues on speed dial when their clients want out of a contract or when the other side wants out. Often times, however, litigators are not involved until that point. Join Matthew Karlyn (transactional partner) and Courtney Worcester (litigator) as they continue their discussion of why a team effort early on in the process of reviewing and drafting contracts provides the best protection and long-term value for clients. Using real life examples of contract provisions, they provide helpful drafting tips and cautionary tales to protect your clients under a variety of circumstances.

The effective and persuasive use of exhibits at trial, both substantive and demonstrative, is vital to a trial lawyer’s success. In this session of our popular series of programs on key aspects of trial, trial preparation, and litigation skills, Jones Day partners Tom Jackson and Mike Ginsberg discuss the creation, admission, and use of exhibits to enhance the persuasiveness of the evidentiary presentation at trial. In particular, our presenters, who have over 50 years of combined experience in litigation and have been teaching trial skills to Jones Day associates and others for more than 20 years, discuss the use of exhibits to set the scene, to explain key facts and relationships, and to highlight evidentiary issues central to the lawsuit. View 2012-2013 programs from the Trial Skills series: 2243- Preparing for, Taking, and Defending Depositions $120.00Audio CD Add to Cart $120.00Online Audio Add to Cart

Our popular series of programs on key aspects of trial, trial preparation, and litigation skills continues with Jones Day partners Tom Jackson and Mike Ginsberg, who discuss jury selection techniques and strategy, including a focus on using the jury selection process to start "selling" your case themes to the jury. Topics covered by Messrs. Jackson and Ginsberg, who have over 50 years of combined experience in litigation and have been teaching trial skills to Jones Day associates and others for more than 20 years, also include: • methods of questioning so that you can determine which prospective jurors are most likely to be receptive to your client's perspective, and • suggested ways of identifying potential juror biases. View 2012-2013 programs from the Trial Skills series: 2243- Preparing for, Taking, and Defending Depositions 2244- Tips for Persuasive Motion

Join Dan Foster and Leigh Martinson, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, as they explain and discuss the America Invents Act's newly-established procedures (which became effective September 16, 2012) for Inter Partes Review. These procedures provide alternatives to litigation to challenge the validity of a patent issued by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO).

The question of what subject matter is eligible to be protected by a patent under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and what subject matter is an unpatentable law of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract idea has been brought to the forefront in a number of recent cases. The Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Mayo Collborative Servs. v. Promethueus Labs., Inc. (Mayo) relates to whether certain medical diagnostic methods are patent-eligible or unpatentable “laws of nature.” The Federal Circuit’s decision in Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO and Myriad Genetics (Myriad) (August 16, 2012), remanded for reconsideration by the Supreme Court after Mayo, addresses the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and related diagnostic methods. Join Michael J. Kasdan of Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, as he discusses the impact of Mayo and Myriad in determining what pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and methods may be patented. And because Mayo and Myriad are also part of