U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Text Made Public Providing Important Details on How Companies Can Capitalize on New Korean Market Access Opportunities
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.04.07
The U.S. and Korean Governments have publicly released the text of the recently concluded U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement ("FTA"). The comprehensive 24 chapter agreement (over 1,000 pages) provides details on the schedule for the elimination of Korean tariffs on U.S. manufactured goods and agricultural products, new market access opportunities for U.S. financial and other service sectors, investment protection and Korean obligations to benefit U.S. companies in key sectors such as pharmaceuticals, autos, and intellectual property-related industries. The final legal text is scheduled to be signed on June 30 and then will be submitted to Congress for ratification. Our FTA team has been deeply involved throughout the entire negotiation process and is prepared to provide an in-depth analysis of the FTA and/or specific provisions which have an impact on your company's product or sector.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.07.25
On July 25, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in United States ex. rel. Sedona Partners LLC v. Able Moving & Storage Inc. et al., holding that a district court cannot ignore new factual allegations included in an amended complaint filed by a False Claims Act qui tam relator based on the fact that those additional facts were learned in discovery, even while a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with the heightened pleading standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) is pending. Under Rule 9(b), allegations of fraud typically must include factual support showing the who, what, where, why, and how of the fraud to survive a defendant’s motion to dismiss. And while that standard has not changed, Sedona gives room for a relator to file first and seek out discovery in order to amend an otherwise deficient complaint and survive a motion to dismiss, at least in the Eleventh Circuit. Importantly, however, the Eleventh Circuit clarified that a district court retains the discretion to dismiss a relator’s complaint before or after discovery has begun, meaning that district courts are not required to permit discovery at the pleading stage. Nevertheless, the Sedona decision is an about-face from precedent in the Eleventh Circuit, and many other circuits, where, historically, facts learned during discovery could not be used to circumvent Rule 9(b) by bolstering a relator’s factual allegations while a motion to dismiss was pending. While the long-term effects of the decision remain to be seen, in the short term the decision may encourage relators to engage in early discovery in hopes of learning facts that they can use to survive otherwise meritorious motions to dismiss.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.06.25
FinCEN Delays Implementation Date and Reopens AML/CFT Rule for Investment Advisers
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.06.25
Series of Major Data Breaches Targeting the Insurance Industry
Client Alert | 11 min read | 08.06.25