Sorry for interrupting, but there is something we need to tell you...

We have updated our Cookie Policy to reflect changes in the law on cookies used on websites in Europe. This website uses cookies to maximize your experience and help us to understand how we can improve it. To find out more click here.

Cookies are text files containing small amounts of data which are downloaded to your computer, or other device, when you visit a website. Cookies allow us to recognize your computer and improve your experience on our website. Some cookies are also necessary for the technical operation of our website. Please read our Cookie Policy which provides important information about the cookies we use, how we use them and how they can be deleted. Please remember that deleting cookies may affect your experience of our website.

Show less.

Accept and hide this message
Pillsbury Pillsbury Pillsbury
Email Page Print Friendly Version Text Size

Publications & Presentations

We encourage you to peruse this Publications & Presentations section for timely analysis and industry insights, including bylined articles, client alerts, white papers, practice and industry newsletters, audio and video broadcasts, featuring interviews with our lawyers, as well as case studies highlighting compelling legal challenges our clients have faced.

Also, please visit our Events page to learn more about upcoming seminars, CLE programs, and other presentations which may be of interest.

Recent Publications

SEC Continues Crackdown on Employer Whistleblower Restrictions
Current and prior severance agreements and other employment-related contracts should be reviewed.
Authors: Kathryn A. Nyce, Sarah A. Good, Susan P. Serota, Kenneth W. Taber, Paula M. Weber


  • SEC is targeting contract terms that appear to restrict contact with the SEC or require employee whistleblowers to waive monetary recoveries.
  • Express disclosure of these rights in severance agreements is now required by the SEC.
  • The fact that the contract did not thwart any whistleblowers is not an adequate defense.

Warning Shot Fired (Finally) at Improper DCAA Cost Disallowance Basis
Authors: James J. Gallagher, Kevin J. Slattum, Glenn Sweatt

For a number of years, contractors have been required to expend substantial sums challenging baseless legal theories initiated by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and rubber-stamped by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) without proper exercise of its authority.

CalEnviroScreen 3.0 – Still the Wrong Tool for CEQA Review
Authors: Norman F. Carlin, Kevin Ashe

On January 9, 2017, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) and Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) released an “Update to the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool,” better known as CalEnviroScreen Version 3.0. CalEnviroScreen is a software tool used to identify and direct resources to communities affected by pollution, based on environmental exposure and population data. However, as guidance for prior CalEnviroScreen versions made clear, the tool’s approach to “cumulative impacts” is very different from that of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While Version 3.0 omits that clear statement, lead agencies and project proponents should rest assured that CEQA law has not changed and CalEnviroScreen remains the wrong tool for CEQA review of local projects and permitting decisions.

2017 Brings Changes to the Federal Executive Branch Gift Rules
Authors: Kathryn E. Donovan, Emily B. Erlingsson, Anita D. Stearns Mayo

The Office of Government Ethics (OGE) recently amended the executive branch gift rules, which became effective on January 1, 2017. The changes include clarifications to existing exceptions that are frequently used as well as a new exception.

Ninth Circuit Lowers Hurdle for Class Certification
Declines to Adopt “Administrative Feasibility” as Independent Requirement of Rule 23
Authors: Christine A. Scheuneman, Fusae Nara, Nathaniel R. Smith

On January 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to adopt “administrative feasibility” as an independent requirement for class certification. It held that Rule 23 does not require class counsel to show at the class certification stage that there is an “administratively feasible” means to identify all class members. It recognized the need to minimize administrative burdens of identifying and notifying absent class members, but found that Rule 23 already contains specific ways to achieve that goal.

Practice / Industry
Focus Teams
From Date
To Date
Pillsbury Pillsbury Pillsbury