Yesterday, the Court in the ATS Tree Services v. FTC case denied Plaintiff ATS Tree’s Motion to Stay and Enjoin the FTC’s recent ban on non-compete agreements (the “Final Rule”), because, the Court held, ATS Tree failed to establish irreparable harm and a likelihood of success on the merits. This puts this court’s ruling in direct conflict with the July
Continue Reading Federal Court in Pennsylvania Creates District Split on Enforceability of FTC Non-Compete Ban
Having achieved a milestone in obtaining a limited preliminary injunction halting the application of the FTC ban on non-competes effective September 4, 2024 as to the named plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors in its Texas lawsuit, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce et al. and Ryan, LLC moved today, July 10, to expand the injunction to apply more broadly. Specifically, plaintiffs moved Chief
Continue Reading U.S. Chamber and Ryan Seek to Expand Injunction Halting FTC Non-Compete Ban
While the two federal actions in Texas challenging the FTC’s non-compete ban have garnered much of the attention to date, a challenge of the FTC’s rule brought by a small tree trimming business in Pennsylvania is now in the spot light as the federal court there has indicated that it will issue a ruling by July 23rd.
Earlier this
Continue Reading Pennsylvania Federal Court to Issue Decision On FTC Non-Compete Ban Challenge By July 23
This afternoon, the FTC voted to adopt a proposed final rule banning most non-competes with workers in the United States. The final rule provides that it is an unfair method of competition—and therefore a violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act—for employers to enter into non-competes with workers. The Commission found that non-competes tend to negatively affect competitive conditions
Continue Reading FTC Approves Rule Banning Non-Competes With Workers
The FTC announced today that it will be hosting a special virtual open meeting on April 23, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. Eastern to discuss its proposed final rule regarding non-competes.
According to the FTC, on the agenda, is the FTC’s proposed rule to ban noncompete clauses:
The Commission will vote on whether to issue a proposed final rule that
Continue Reading FTC To Consider Issuing Proposed Final Rule Regarding Non-Competes
On March 21, 2024, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) approved a Federal Register notice seeking public comment on its proposal to revise its current Statement of Policy on Bank Merger Transactions. Among the proposed revisions, the agency’s proposal will prohibit non-compete agreements in bank mergers in which the selling bank is required to divest all or a portion
Continue Reading FDIC Updates Bank Merger Guidance to Include Non-Compete Ban
Seyfarth Synopsis: While New York State failed to pass a non-compete ban last year, a new bill in the New York City Council would eliminate non-compete agreements entirely, presenting new challenges and considerations for employers in the Big Apple.
On December 12, 2023, the New York State Legislature delivered a bill for the Governor’s signature that would have banned “any agreement, or clause contained in any agreement, between an employer and a covered individual that prohibits or restricts such covered individual from obtaining employment, after the conclusion of employment with the employer included as a party to the agreement.” Governor Hochul vetoed that bill on December 22, 2023, and thus far there has been no further activity on this subject in the new Legislative term.
Stepping into the breach, two members of the New York City Council introduced a bill on February 28, 2024 that would ban all current and future non-compete agreements in the Big Apple. The bill broadly applies to “an agreement between an employer and a worker that prevents, or effectively prevents, the worker from seeking or accepting work for a different employer, or from operating a business, after the worker no longer works for the employer.” The bill defines “worker” to include independent contractors and specifies that it is unlawful to merely attempt to enter into a non-compete agreement with any worker.Continue Reading NYC Council Proposes Broad Non-Compete Ban
In the ever-evolving digital landscape as well as legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the use of non-competes, the preservation of trade secrets stands as a cornerstone for businesses striving to secure a competitive edge. As we continue to navigate the complexities of remote work and the jurisdictional differences in restrictive covenant enforcement, the safeguarding of these invaluable
Continue Reading Webinar Recap! Navigating the Intersection of Non-Compete Agreements and Employee Mobility
The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) sent shockwaves through the employment landscape when General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo took the position that the “proffer, maintenance, and enforcement” of restrictive covenants could violate Section 7 and Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). As we previously blogged, the NLRB seemingly took the position that non-competes typically violate Section 8(a)(1) of the Act, which makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer to interfere with an employee’s Section 7 rights. We also noted that this theory could wreak havoc on routine employee departure litigation by creating a turf war between the court system and the NLRB.
But a recent memorandum provided by the Division of Advice to a regional office suggests that the NLRB’s antagonism towards non-competes may be more limited in practice. The memorandum addressed a fact pattern common to readers. An employee had an agreement with a company that placed restrictions on the employee’s ability to solicit or accept business from the company’s customers, to disclose confidential information, and to have competitive employment during the term of employment.Continue Reading Is the NLRB’s New Stance on Restrictive Covenants Mostly Bark With a Little Bite?
Love is in the air. With Valentine’s Day just around the corner, we’re writing to share some heartfelt news about a recent change in California law that might just make your heart skip a beat.
In the spirit of spreading love (and compliance), a new law, Section 16600.1 of the Business and Professions Code, has made it unlawful to
Continue Reading California’s New Love Law: Seyfarth’s Valentine’s Day Legal Update on Non-Competes and Compliance Messages