December 13, 2022
Volume XII, Number 347
December 13, 2022
– DOL Issues Final Rule Amending Investment Duties Regulation –…by: James Frazier
– Third time lucky or Schrems III? The European Union Data Pact with…by: Diletta De Cicco and James Downes
– Renewed Era of Crypto Assets Growth in Hong Kong by: Jay Lee
– Division I Universities Must Be Ready for Changes to the NCAA…by: Paul V.Kelly
– U.S.Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Case Testing Limits of…
by: Michelle E.Phillips and Christopher M.Repole
– Damages in Pre-Certification Discovery are Premature, Discovery…by: Jenniffer Cabrera
– When Chains Change, Do NFTs Stay The Same? How Hard Forks May Affect…
by: Jason H.Finger
– COVID-19: A Roadmap to Fraud Investigations: Office of Inspector…by: Stephen D.Bittinger
– Update: OFCCP Plans to Disclose EEO-1 Data for Non-Objecting…by: Abby M.Warren
– DOJ Antitrust Division and HHS OIG Enter into Partnership to Increase…
by: Diane Hazel
– Can Discovery Be Compelled from a Party? Possession, Custody, Control…by: Kathryn C.Cole
– Weekly Bankruptcy Alert December 13, 2022 by: Bankruptcy & Creditors’ Rights
– All Things Chemical® Podcast: TSCA Regulation of Articles: The Saga…by: Lynn L.Bergeson
– Energy & Sustainability M&A Activity — December 2022 by: Thomas R.
Burton, III and Sahir Surmeli
– Energy & Sustainability IP Updates — December 2022 by: Brad M.Scheller
– SEC Reopens Proposal on Stock Buyback Rules by: Erin Reeves McGinnis
– Chips Chatter: December 5-12, 2022 by: Pablo E.Carrillo and Ludmilla L.
Kasulke
– How may behavioral advertising trackers do websites deploy currently? by: David A.Zetoony
– FRB Proposes Climate-Related Financial Risk Management Principles by: Daniel Meade
– Energy & Sustainability Litigation Updates — December 2022 by: Jacob H.Hupart
– Cross Border Recognition, 25 years on: the view from each side of the…by: Michelle N.Saney
– A New Era of Technology in the Private Markets by: Louis Lehot and Christopher Converse
– New York City Postpones Enforcement of Automated Employment Decision…by: Simone R.D.
Francis
– New Law Seeks To Curtail Coerced Debts by: Keith Paul Bishop
– Republican SEC Commissioners Continue to Criticize Proposed Climate…by: Jacob H.Hupart
December 12, 2022
– Raters gonna rate…but there’s a bright side! by: Daniel B.Guggenheim
– SEC Awards More than $20 Million to Whistleblower by: Mary Jane Wilmoth
– Estate Planning for Football Season Ticket Holders by: Katherine M.Szymanski and Rebecca K.
Wrock
– American Hospital Association Urges DEA to Issue Special Registration…by: Nathaniel M.Lacktman
– EPA Announces $25.7 Million in Grants to Support Water Systems in…by: EPA
– Weekly IRS Roundup December 5 – December 9, 2022 by: Tax Practice Group McDermott Will Emery
– CMS Announces Strategy on Value-Based Payments for Specialty Care by: Anahita Anvari
– DOL Proposes Self-Correction Option and Other Changes to Voluntary…by: Justin S Alex
– The City of Los Angeles’ Fair Work Week Ordinance Requires…by: Tomi Oshita
– Recent Developments in Telehealth Enforcement by: Sara Helene Shanti and Danielle Vrabie
– ESG INVESTING AND PROXY VOTING: DOL’S NEW FINAL RULE by: Kristina M.
Zanotti and Ruth E.Delaney
– IN A NEW YORK MINUTE, Telemarketing Laws Are Changing! by: Angelika Munger
– More Places, Less Spaces: California is Driving Down Development Costs by: Amanda S.Lee
– Bereavement Leave Becomes Mandatory in the Golden State by: Kaleb N.Berhe
– New Year Brings New Laws for Illinois Employers by: Mikela T.Sutrina and Katherine H.Oblak
– Decision in U.S.v.
Holland by: Gabriel L.
Imperato
– Top Five Labor Law Developments for November 2022 by: Jonathan J.Spitz and Richard F.Vitarelli
– “Cold-Pressed Juice” Lawsuit Permanently Dismissed by: Food and Drug Law at Keller and Heckman
– USPTO Releases New Guidelines Shortening the Response Deadline in…by: Luna M.Samman
– ‘No Exit’: SEC Sanctions Investment Adviser for Impeding…by: Peter D.
Hutcheon
– TradeTalk China: December 2 – December 9, 2022 by: Pablo E.Carrillo and Ludmilla L.Kasulke
– $10.3 Million in Grants Awarded to Improve the Health of Long Island…by: EPA
– RE-STRUC: Tax Changes as of 2023 by: Thomas van der Vliet and Louisa van Isselmuden
– The CAC Assessment Collection – Part 2: What Must Be Done Before…
by: Amigo L.Xie and Dan Wu
– Here We Go Again: Lesser Prairie-Chicken Re-Listed Under the…by: Karma B.Brown and Linda Trees
– What’s more common: opt-in, opt-out, or notice cookie banners? by: David A.Zetoony
– An Unstoppable Force Meets an Immovable Object: Microsoft to Fight…by: Jonathan Rubin
– Who Qualifies As An Expert Witness? by: Keith Paul Bishop
December 11, 2022
December 10, 2022
Division I Universities Must Be Ready for Changes to the NCAA Infractions Process
The NCAA Division I Board of Directors has adopted key changes to the way in which NCAA infractions matters will be investigated and processed in the future.
The changes, which take effect on January 1, 2023, are intended to modernize and enhance the process, while focusing resources on the most serious violations.Another objective is to reduce the time needed to process and resolve violation proceedings.
President of the University of Georgia and Chair of the Division I Board of Directors Jere Morehead said in August that NCAA members are “committed to resolving cases fairly and in a timely fashion, thus holding those responsible for violations accountable and avoiding penalizing those who were not involved in rule-breaking.”
Among the key changes are the following:
Enhanced duty to cooperate: Institutions, staff, and student-athletes, upon learning of potential violations, will be required to preserve information, to provide immediate access to all electronic devices, and to encourage family members, spouses, boosters, and others to cooperate in the investigation.The number of aggravating and mitigating factors in the Bylaws has been expanded to reward prompt and full cooperation and deter efforts to hinder or impede investigations.
New head coach responsibility standard: Head coaches will be held responsible for serious violations committed by those who report to them directly or indirectly.Only in determining the appropriate penalty will the Committee on Infractions (COI) consider whether the head coach promoted compliance and monitored the program.
The previous infractions approach, which included a rebuttable presumption of responsibility on the part of a head coach, has been abandoned.
Additional method for resolution: A new alternative for resolving infractions cases has been added, with the aim of providing the COI greater flexibility and reserving full hearings for only the most serious cases.The new method, known as a “Written Record Hearing,” will be employed in cases in which the facts are largely undisputed and the alleged violations not numerous or significant.
Clarification of appeal standard and limitation of appeals: Findings and penalties by the COI will be affirmed by the Infractions Appeals Committee (IAC) if there is information in the record that supports the decision.
Findings and penalties will not be set aside unless no reasonable person could have made the ruling given the factual record.Appeals to the IAC as to the penalties imposed will be limited to those sanctions that fall outside legislated penalty guidelines, or “core penalties.” The majority of appeals will be decided based on the written record without the need for oral argument.Finally, and as is also the case with the revised COI process, extensions of time will be granted only in extreme and clearly defined circumstances.
Aggravating and mitigating factors: The new guidelines clarify which factors apply to institutions and which apply to involved individuals.Previously, this was unclear and often debated.New aggravating factors have been added, including hindering an investigation or inhibiting the COI’s processing of a case.
New mitigating factors also have been added, including a demonstration of exemplary cooperation by, for example, securing meaningful cooperation from an outside party.
Name, image and likeness (NIL): In this rapidly evolving area, the bylaws provide that if available information indicates that behaviors surrounding an NIL offer or agreement is contrary to NCAA legislation, it shall be presumed that a violation occurred.The charged institution or involved individual will then be required to rebut this presumption with credible and sufficient information that a violation did not occur.
In addition to the above changes, the new infractions construct eliminates the Independent Accountability Resolution Process (IARP), which had been created at the recommendation of the Commission on College Basketball chaired by Condoleezza Rice.While acknowledging the panel’s thoroughness in deciding the several cases referred to the IARP, it was concluded that this new process prolonged case timelines and required substantial additional resources to bring cases to resolution.
Finally, the Board of Directors announced that it will consider additional future changes that may help to deliver timely and fair outcomes in infractions matters.
Among the subjects under further consideration are (i) requiring increased documentation of recruiting efforts, (ii) adjusting the size and composition of the COI, (iii) modification of penalty ranges (including alternatives to post-season bans), and (iv) enhancing confidentiality rules for involved parties during investigation by the NCAA enforcement staff..