Insights

Peter Eyre, a Washington, D.C. partner in Crowell & Moring's Government Contracts Group, discusses the implications of the Defense Contract Management Agency's (DCMA) recently issued instructions to oversee contractors' efforts to exclude counterfeit electronic parts from their supply chains. Eyre says that the DCMA instruction "answers some questions but raises others."

Kirsten L. Nathanson, a Washington, D.C.-based Environment & Natural Resources partner, shares her perspective on the significance of recent U.S. Supreme Court case rulings during a panel hosted by the George Mason University School of Law's Law and Economics Center. Nathanson observed that in a 5-4 vote, the justices said EPA's estimated $9.6 billion/year of costs and $4-6 million/year of benefits from the regulation was a gap that was too big to ignore. "This was the first time the court required consideration of costs when Congress was silent," she said. Panelists discussed and examined precedent set by decisions in cases such as Michigan v. EPA, Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, and King v. Burwell. 

Thomas A. Lorenzen, a Washington, D.C.-based Environment & Natural Resources partner, discusses with Forbes the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Michigan v. EPA, which rejected the Obama administration's stance that the EPA need not consider costs when it determines that a utility pollutant must be regulated. The case, considered a challenge by the utility industry and 23 states whose electricity rates would likely rise if coal-fired power plants close, will now return to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. "It means that EPA can really no longer take any comfort in the fact there is a Chevron doctrine out there," Lorenzen said. "The courts are going to look skeptically" at regulations that have a major effect on the economy, he said. Lorenzen was also quoted in  Bloomberg, Bloomberg BNA, Congressional Quarterly, Financial Times, Law360, and Greenwire for his analysis of this high-profile ruling.

Washington, D.C.-based partner and member of the firm's Environment & Natural Resources Group, Daniel W. Wolff, talks with Bloomberg BNA about the Ninth Circuit's decision to hear a case that may decide whether airborne pollutants transmitted from a smelter to a Superfund site constitute an actionable disposal for which the smelter owner is liable as an arranger. Wolff remarked that, "It's a frightening construct if you're advising a client, but my sense is that the Ninth Circuit will agree with the district court's interpretation, because it isn't an arbitrary one."

Crowell & Moring's Washington, D.C.-based partner, Daniel W. Wolff, comments in coverage of the Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association case in which the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the U.S. Labor Department, ruling that federal agencies don't have to go through formal rule-making to make significant changes to rules interpreting regulations. Wolff's views on this case also were featured in additional news outlets, including BNA.

Washington, D.C.-based senior counsel in the firm's Environment & Natural Resources Group, Robert Meyers, talks with Law360 regarding Congress' approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, which is likely going to be vetoed by President Obama. With a veto looming, Meyers offers that Congress may look at other areas, such as transmission siting and grid reliability, that don’t have the political history of Keystone and could have some reasonable prospect of success in 2015. "I imagine the House will reach out in a bipartisan manner on the type of economic issues where you can get that, as opposed to those that boil down to environmental issues," Meyers said.

Washington, D.C.-based Government Contacts Group partner, Peter Eyre, talks to Law360 regarding a final rule that will tighten restrictions on human trafficking in government contracting. Under its requirements, all contractors must disclose working conditions to employees, are barred from confiscating passports or other immigration documents, must ensure that workers aren't being charged any recruitment fees, and must provide the worker with return transportation for non-nationals. "I think another big question is: 'Who pays for this?'" Eyre said. "There are some very specific obligations, both the compliance plan ... and others. But who is going to pay for that?"

Robert Meyers, Washington, D.C.-based senior counsel in the firm's Environment & Natural Resources Group, discusses potential new fuel economy regulations after record Clean Air Act fines were levied last year for greenhouse gas emission and fuel economy reporting violations. "In broad brush, I think this is a signal of increasing scrutiny, and I would attribute some of it to the fact of the suggested rulemaking," Meyers said.

David B. Blair, a Washington, D.C.-based partner in Crowell & Moring's Tax Group, shares his thoughts on a major pricing dispute case, Amazon.com Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and its importance for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). "This could be the IRS' second attempt after the Veritas case to win this issue of cost-sharing arrangements and whether a buy-in should be based on a cost-sharing method. Veritas was a big loss for the IRS," Blair noted.

Washington, D.C.-based partners, Terry Rea, of Crowell & Moring's Intellectual Property Group, and Keith J. Harrison, of the firm's Labor & Employment and Litigation groups, weigh in on two important cases in the life sciences arena. Harrison discusses Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.'s challenge of a California appellate decision that a generic-drug manufacturer can be held liable for failing to warn consumers of the side effects listed on the equivalent brand-name drug, which may potentially be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court. "This is going to be a case that is going to further define the scope of federal preemption," Harrison said. Additionally, Rea talks about the Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC suit, which argues that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board uses the incorrect standard during America Invents Act (AIA) proceedings, making it difficult for inventors to retain their patents. "Everybody is going to be very, very careful how they handle this [case]," Rea said of the suit, which may upend new IPR standards.

Washington, D.C.-based Government Contacts Group partner, Peter Eyre, discusses the expanded authority of the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) and how it will effect various companies and agencies, especially the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and its contractors. "Contractors and subcontractors that traditionally haven't dealt with rated orders are more likely to see them because of this expansion. Companies will need to become familiar with these obligations," Eyre said. "And I suspect that civilian agencies — especially DHS — are going to be figuring out how to use the expanded coverage and authority."

Cheryl A. Falvey, a Washington, D.C.-based partner and co-chair of the firm's Advertising and Product Risk Management Group, is featured as one of the NLJ’s "2014 Governance, Risk & Compliance Trailblazers & Pioneers." The National Law Journal highlights the experience Falvey gained as general counsel of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, as well as her outlook for the bright future ahead for consumer safety.

Law360 highlights the 2014 second quarter promotions and leadership announcements among various law firms. The Crowell & Moring attorneys mentioned include: Elieen M. Gleimer and Gerald F. Murphy, named co-chairs of the firm's Aviation Group; Bryan Brewer, named co-chair of the firm's Corporate Group; Ian A. Laird, named co-chair of the firm's International Dispute Resolution group; and Eric Edwards, named chair of the firm's Government Affairs Group.

Washington, D.C.-based partner in Crowell & Moring's Environment & Natural Resources Group and member of the group's steering committee, Kirsten L. Nathanson, discusses how Environmental Protection Agency cases faired in the Supreme Court's recent term. As mixed feelings arise, Nathanson chalked the past term up as a win for the EPA stating the agency's victory in the EPA v. EME Homer case that resurrected the EPA's regulation of air pollution crossing state borders.