Gibbons Law Alert

Gibbons Law Alert Blog

Superfund Task Force Listening Session on Recommendation 21: Encouraging PRPs to Integrate Reuse Opportunities into Cleanups

Posted in Development/Redevelopment / Environmental and Green Issues

On June 14, 2018

On June 11, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held the fourth of its listening sessions on the recommendations of its Superfund Task Force to improve the implementation of the federal Superfund program. This session focused on Recommendation 21, which is to encourage Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) to integrate reuse opportunities into their cleanup plans. The EPA presenters began by providing the background of the Superfund Task Force Report and its five overall goals: (1) expediting cleanup and remediation; (2) reinvigorating PRP cleanup and reuse; (3) encouraging private investment; (4) promoting redevelopment and community revitalization; and (5) engaging partners and stake holders. The EPA presenters identified why PRPs may have an incentive for incorporating reuse into their cleanup plans. They also posed two questions: (1) why do PRPs not routinely consider re-use when performing site investigations and cleanups; and (2) what options and incentives can EPA use to assist PRPs in integrating re-use into their decision-making process? A copy of the slide presentation accompanying EPA’s oral presentations is available here. EPA then opened the floor for questions and comments from the participants in the listening session. There was only one comment made during the call: a lawyer from Northwestern Pritzker Law School commented that it was not clear that emphasizing reuse of sites is consistent...

Incentivizing Global Monetization of U.S. Based IP Rights – The Carrot and the Stick of the 2017 Tax Act

by Peter J. Ulrich and Jean E. Dassie

Posted in Licensing / Patent

On June 12, 2018

The 2017 Tax Act, signed into law on December 22, 2017, encompasses the most significant and wide-ranging changes to the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) since 1986. This article addresses both the new taxation of global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) and a new deduction for foreign-derived intangible income (“FDII”), as they relate to patent rights. GILTI and FDII will significantly affect the tax strategies of multinational corporations, particularly those with valuable intellectual property rights held abroad. The new tax laws do not define intangible property through a list of specific types of assets, including intellectual property like patents. Rather, intangible property under the new laws encompasses anything not strictly considered a tangible asset. This expanded definition applies when determining the GILTI and FDII amounts. GILTI New IRC Section 951A effectively imposes a minimum tax on U.S. shareholders who own at least 10% of controlled foreign corporations (“CFCs”) to the extent the CFCs have “global intangible low-taxed income.” The Tax Act provides a formula for calculating GILTI, which exempts the deemed returns on tangible assets. The GILTI amount is calculated by subtracting the “net deemed tangible income return” from the “net CFC tested income.” The remainder is deemed intangible income subject to income tax. Practically, the GILTI base is determined by subtracting a normal return for the...

Superfund Task Force Listening Session – Exploring CERCLA Environmental Liability Transfer Approaches

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Development/Redevelopment / Environmental and Green Issues

On June 12, 2018

On June 5, 2018 the Superfund Task Force held another of its eight scheduled public listening sessions intended to solicit public and stakeholder input relating to recommendations contained in the Task Force’s July 2017 report. The listening session focused on Recommendation 22, which suggests exploring Environmental Liability Transfer (ELT) approaches and other risk management tools. While Recommendation 22 addresses a variety of risk management approaches Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) might use to transfer responsibilities, the listening session honed in on ELTs specifically. Participants in the listening session were able to follow along with a presentation from Greg Wall of OSRE’s Regional Support Division, Erik Hanselman of OSRE’s Policy and Program Evaluation Division, and Charlie Howland from the Region 3 Office of Regional Counsel, who described the general function of ELTs and offered details from two case-studies where ELTs were used effectively to spur cleanup by private parties at sites with unique challenges. As detailed by the presenters during the session, an ELT is a mechanism whereby PRPs contractually transfer their cleanup response obligations to a specialized third party for a negotiated price. The upside to the public of such arrangements is that they encourage cleanup by specialized private parties who are particularly motivated to cleanup and redevelop properties as expeditiously as possible, all of which helps to...

Third Circuit Holds Agreement to Arbitrate in Illusory Forum Is Unenforceable

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Class Action Defense

On June 11, 2018

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently held, in a precedential decision, that when parties enter an agreement directing them to arbitrate in an illusory forum, the forum selection clause is not severable and the entire agreement to arbitrate is unenforceable. In MacDonald v. CashCall, Inc. et al., a plaintiff brought suit on behalf of himself and a putative class, alleging a loan agreement between the parties was unconscionable and usurious. The agreement at issue included “(1) a provision requiring that all disputes be resolved through arbitration conducted by a representative of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe (‘CRST’) and (2) a clause that delegates questions about the arbitration provision’s enforceability to the arbitrator.” The defendants moved to compel arbitration. The district court declined to compel arbitration because the agreement at issue expressly disavowed federal and state law, thus rendering the arbitration provisions invalid as an impermissible prospective waiver of federal and state statutory rights. The district court further held that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable because the forum was illusory, as the selected forum did not conduct arbitrations or have rules for conducting arbitrations. The Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s conclusion that the loan agreement’s arbitration provision cannot direct arbitration to an illusory forum—here, the CRST. Similar to its sister circuits, the Third Circuit...

Superfund Task Force Recommendation 27 Listening Session: New Tools to Encourage Private Investment in Cleaning Up and Reusing Superfund Sites

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Development/Redevelopment / Environmental and Green Issues

On June 8, 2018

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held a listening session concerning the Superfund Task Force (“Task Force”) Recommendation 27 on June 5, 2018 focusing on new tools for reusing Superfund sites through private investment. The EPA created the Task Force in May 2017, and it is comprised of senior representatives from various EPA offices associated with Superfund policy and enforcement. The Task Force intends to streamline and strengthen the Superfund program. In July 2017, the Task Force issued a report containing five goals and forty-two recommendations. The Task Force’s five goals are to: i) expedite the cleanup and remediation process; ii) reinvigorate responsible party cleanup and reuse; iii) encourage private investment; iv) promote development and community revitalization; and v) engage parties and stakeholders. Recommendation 27 seeks to implement some or all of the five goals by identifying tools for third parties interested in opportunities that support the cleanup or reuse of priority sites. EPA understands potential investors have concerns about uncertain liabilities, and looks to identify those specific concerns and to identify tools that may address such concerns. For example, the agency may determine standard language to include in agreements that would facilitate financing, and may create public-private partnership investment opportunities and structure. During the listening session, EPA noted that there are existing tools to clarify...

In Defective Shingles Class Action, Third Circuit Rejects Novel “Expected Useful Life” Defect Theory Premised on Warranty Period

by Michael R. McDonald and Caroline E. Oks

Posted in Class Action Defense

On June 8, 2018

The Third Circuit recently confirmed that plaintiffs must provide evidence of a specific defect, capable of classwide proof, in order to prevail on proposed class claims, holding that, where defective design is “an essential element of Plaintiffs’ misrepresentation-based claims,” whether proof of the defect “is susceptible to classwide evidence is dispositive of whether Plaintiffs can satisfy predominance” under Rule 23(b)(3). In Gonzalez v. Owens Corning, the plaintiffs sued the manufacturer of Oakridge fiberglass roofing shingles, claiming that their shingles, which were subject to warranties of 25 years or more, were “plagued by design flaws that result in cracking, curling and degranulation” and “will eventually fail.” The plaintiffs argued that the product warranties amounted to representations about the shingles’ expected useful life. Plaintiffs did not dispute that the design specifications for all shingles met the applicable industry design standard (“ASTM”), but claimed that compliance with the ASTM specifications did not consistently yield shingles that would last the stated warranty period. Thus, plaintiffs claimed that the issue of “defectiveness should be judged by the expected useful life of the shingles as represented by the applicable warranty period.” The plaintiffs’ expert, whose testimony was largely stricken as unreliable under Daubert, acknowledged that there was no single set of measurements applicable to all shingles that would constitute a design...

2018 Primary Yields (Mostly) Anticipated Results

by Michael D. DeLoreto

Posted in Elections

On June 7, 2018

New Jerseyans went to the polls on June 5th to select their party’s nominees for the November elections. The most closely watched races were the primaries for the upcoming Congressional races. Nationally, Democrats see a path to gain control of the House of Representatives and possibly the U.S. Senate, but it requires that the party hold their current seats while picking up enough open seats and defeating incumbent Republicans to gain the majority. U.S. Senate As expected, incumbent Democratic Senator Bob Menendez will face Republican Bob Hugin, the former CEO of Celgene. In addition to holding Senator Menendez’s seat, Democrats must win at least two Senate seats held by Republicans in order to flip control of the Senate. House of Representatives Democrats must flip 25 seats nationally to gain control of the House. Democrats believe three of those seats could be in New Jersey, which has a delegation of seven Democrats and five Republicans. In the 2nd Congressional District, State Senator Jeff Van Drew won a contested primary to earn the Democratic nomination. He will face Republican Seth Grossman, an attorney and former local and county office holder. While Senator Van Drew was expected to win the primary, Mr. Grossman faced an uphill battle defeating frontrunner Hirsh Singh, former Assemblyman Sam Fiocchi, and former FBI...

NYC Paid Sick/Safe Time Law Expands

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Family Leave

On May 30, 2018

New York City’s Sick Leave Law was expanded on May 5, 2018, to include additional reasons for eligible employees to use NYC paid sick leave (called “safe leave”) including: to obtain services from a domestic violence shelter, rape crisis center, or other shelter or services program for relief from a family offense matter, sexual offense, stalking, or human trafficking; to participate in safety planning, temporarily or permanently relocate, or take other actions to increase the safety of the employee or employee’s family members from future family offense matters, sexual offenses, stalking, or human trafficking; to meet with a civil attorney or other social service provider to obtain information and advice on, and prepare for or participate in any criminal or civil proceeding, including but not limited to, matters related to a family offense matter, sexual offense, stalking, human trafficking, custody, visitation, matrimonial issues, orders of protection, immigration, housing, discrimination in employment, housing or consumer credit; to file a complaint or domestic incident report with law enforcement; to meet with a district attorney’s office; to enroll children in a new school; or to take other actions necessary to maintain, improve, or restore the physical, psychological, or economic health or safety of the employee or the employee’s family member or to protect those who associate or work...

U.S. Supreme Court Issues “Epic” Decision for Employers Upholding Arbitration Agreements and Class Action Waivers

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Alternative Dispute Resolution

On May 24, 2018

On May 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court resolved the split amongst several Federal Circuit Courts by finding the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) enables employers enforce class action waivers in arbitration agreements with their employees notwithstanding employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to engage in “concerted activity.” The Court’s 5-4 decision, with the majority opinion authored by Justice Gorsuch, was rendered in In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis and companion cases Ernst & Young LLP et al. v. Stephen Morris et al. and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil, Inc. (all decided simultaneously). The Court ruled that Congress did not intend the NLRA to provide for class and collective actions, and although the NLRA provides employees the right to organize and bargain collectively, the statute does not dictate how claims must be adjudicated. Accordingly, the Court determined that the NLRA cannot be interpreted to provide employees with an implicit right to class and collective actions in contravention of the FAA, which explicitly confers upon employers and employees the ability to arbitrate and determine their chosen arbitration procedure. Instead, these laws must be interpreted consistently. The three companion cases involve employees challenging arbitration agreements containing class and collective action waivers entered into with their employers. As an example, in the Ernst &...

Feeling the Chill: The Petro Lubricant Decision – Can Correcting an Online Error Hurt You?

by Thomas J. Cafferty

Posted in General Litigation

On May 24, 2018

The New Jersey Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Petro-Lubricant Testing Laboratories, Inc. v. Adelman left unanswered significant questions as to what constitutes a republication when corrections or modifications are made to an online publication, thereby retriggering the statute of limitations for defamation. In a 4-3 opinion, the majority established a test for whether a correction or modification is a republication that increases the likelihood that trial courts will deny summary judgment motions, leaving the question of republication for the jury. The practical effect of this will likely be far fewer corrections to online publications for fear of reviving or extending the applicable statute of limitations. Specifically, the majority held that an online article is republished if an author makes a material and substantive change to the original defamatory article. According to the majority: A material change is one that relates to the defamatory content of the article at issue. It is not a technical website modification or the posting on the website of another article with no connection to the original defamatory article. A substantive change is one that alters the meaning of the original defamatory article or is essentially a new defamatory statement incorporated into the original article. It is not the mere reconfiguring of sentences or substitution of words that are not susceptible of...