Photo of Nick Gouverneur

Nick Gouverneur

Subscribe to Nick Gouverneur's Posts

Nick Gouverneur is an associate with Troutman Pepper.

On May 9, Connecticut Attorney General (AG) William Tong, in collaboration with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut, announced a $495,721 false claims settlement with Advanced Dental Center PC (Advanced Dental) and its owners, Tal Yossefi and Elad Yossefi. The settlement resolves allegations that the business violated both state and federal False Claims Act (FCA) statutes by receiving so-called “recruiting fees” for each Connecticut Medicaid patient referred to the business. No liability was admitted as part of the settlement.

Introduction

On Thursday, March 20, a federal judge in the Northern District of Illinois granted final approval to a settlement agreement under which Clearview AI (Clearview) agreed to pay an estimated $51.75 million to a nationwide class if one of several contingencies takes place. This approved settlement agreement resolves In Re: Clearview AI, Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation, No. 1:21-cv-00135 (N.D. Ill.), a multidistrict suit alleging that the company’s automatic collection, storage, and use of biometric data violated various privacy laws, including Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The unorthodox settlement not only preserves Clearview’s business model, but may also insulate Clearview from subsequent or parallel regulatory investigations without requiring the company to jeopardize the liquidity necessary for continued growth. Ultimately, this settlement seems to represent a good outcome for the company, especially in light of the fact that that it was achieved over the objections from 23 state attorneys general (AG). U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman stated that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate.

New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James and global movie theater operator National Amusements, Inc. (National) settled a lawsuit stemming from a 2022 data breach reported by National, which affected 82,128 National employees. As part of its settlement, National agreed to pay $250,000 in penalties to the state and to “improve existing cybersecurity infrastructure to prevent future data breaches.”

The Internet of Things (IoT) represents a transformative shift in how consumers interact with technology, integrating physical devices with sophisticated services to create interconnected ecosystems. As the adoption of IoT devices skyrockets, with projections estimating 75 billion connected devices by 2025, the legal landscape surrounding these hybrid transactions — comprising goods, software, and services — remains unsettled. Traditional legal frameworks, such as the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), struggle to address the complexities of IoT transactions. Consumer advocacy groups are increasingly calling for regulatory intervention to protect consumers from emerging issues, considering a legislative landscape that is not keeping pace with rapidly evolving technology.

Introduction

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2025 includes a mandate that contractors furnish information and documentation to enable the military to modify and repair equipment and systems. Not surprisingly, industry is pushing back on that mandate. On September 25, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) sent a letter to various industry associations, questioning their motives to prevent a right-to-repair requirement that the Senate included in its proposed defense budget for fiscal year (FY) 2025. Warren also sent a separate letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, expressing concern about contractual restrictions that void contractor warranties when third parties perform repairs and that prevent access to operations, maintenance, integration, and training data.

On September 20, 13 states and Washington, D.C. joined Colorado in its appeal asking the Tenth Circuit to uphold a state law imposing more restrictive interest rate caps on loans from out-of-state banks to residents, arguing that U.S. District Judge Daniel D. Domenico’s injunction “disrupts [ ] careful Congressional balancing and will allow online lenders to flout usury laws.”

On June 2, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced modifications to its in-house adjudicative proceedings of agency challenges to mergers and acquisitions by reducing the decision-making power held by administrative law judges (ALJs). This change will affect how the agency’s antitrust challenges are decided. Even though the previous process had been in place for decades, the FTC was not required to receive public comment because the change affects only internal procedures.