Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

General Practice. Antitrust and Trade Regulation, Banking and Financial Services, Bankruptcy and Creditors' Rights, Biotechnology, Communications, Corporate, Energy Project Finance, Employment, Environmental, Federal Legislative and Regulatory Practice, Group Benefits and Executive Compensation, Health Care, High Technology, Higher Education, Immigration, Intellectual Property, International, Internet, Insurance, Labor, Medical Technology and Pharmaceuticals, Municipal Bonds, Non-Profit Organizations, Real Estate, Securities including Initial Public Offerings, State and Local Government Relations, Taxation, Trusts and Estates, Venture Capital. Trial and Appellate Practice including Commercial Transactions, Construction, Corporate, Insurance Litigation, Product Liability, Securities, Trade Secrets and Unfair Competition, Intellectual Property, White Collar Crime and Other Civil and Criminal Litigation.

California’s New Forced Labor Disclosure Law: Empowering Consumers while Burdening the Supply Chain
Micha "Mitch" Danzig,Eric J. Eastham,Cynthia J. Larose,Benjamin B. Tymann, January 9, 2012
California ushered in the New Year with the usual fanfare and revelry. But 2012 also uncorked new state disclosure requirements for retailers and manufacturers concerning the businesses’ efforts to eradicate human trafficking and slave labor from their supply chains.

Invention Assignment Following Stanford v. Roche: Implications for Technology Transfer and Government Contracts
Jonathan T. Cain,Richard G. Gervase,David E. Johnson,Muriel M. Liberto,Tali M. Tuchin, June 30, 2011
Last week the United States Supreme Court clarified the respective invention ownership rights between federal contractors and their employee-inventors under the Bayh-Dole Act (35 U.S.C. §§201(e), (c), 202(a)) (the “Act”) in Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior...

The Future of Class Action Suits After Wal-Mart v. Dukes
Nathan R. Hamler,Kevin M. McGinty,Daniel T. Pascucci,Ari N. Stern, June 27, 2011
In a historic decision, the Supreme Court decertified a plaintiff class in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, which asserted claims on behalf of 1.5 million female Wal-Mart employees alleging that Wal-Mart discriminated against women on matters of pay and promotion.

Return to the Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. Firm Overview