DHS and DOJ Publish Joint Guidelines for Voluntary Sharing Cyber Threat Indicators and Defensive Measures with Federal Government
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.17.16
On June 15, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security jointly issued with the Department of Justice guidelines and procedures available here for the voluntary sharing and receiving of cyber threat indicators and defensive measures between and among non-federal and federal entities and among private entities for cybersecurity purposes. These guidelines and procedures, which are directed to be published pursuant to the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA), describe what types of information may be shared, the mechanisms for sharing it (including through the DHS-operated Automated Indicator Sharing platform), and how to safeguard privacy and civil liberties to qualify for the liability and other protections afforded by CISA, which include a limited antitrust exemption; exemption from state and federal disclosure laws; exemption from certain state and federal regulatory uses; no waiver of privilege; protection for commercial, financial and proprietary information; and an ex parte communications waiver.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
