Author: TSA Press

The
litigation
analytics
company

Lex
Machina
has
completed
what
it
describes
as
a
milestone
expansion
of
its
data
set
of
court
documents,
adding
another
500,000
federal
district
court
cases
so
that
it
now
has
full
coverage
of
virtually
every
civil
case
filed
in
federal
district
courts
anywhere
in
the
United
States.

The
only
civil
cases
it
does
not
include
are
prisoner
petitions,
which
the
company
deemed
not
commercially
relevant
to
its
customer
base
of
law
firms
and
corporations.

Until
now,
Lex
Machina’s
analytics
have
been
focused
on
specific,
major
practice
areas
(currently
22
practice
areas),
and
in
its
collection
and
tagging
of
federal
cases,
it
prioritized
those
practice
areas.
But
with
this
latest
expansion,
it
has
added
the
remaining
15%
of
district
court
cases
that
did
not
fit
under
one
of
those
major
practice
areas.

“This
is
a
pretty
big
milestone
in
terms
of
our
overall
expansion
to
cover
all
civil
litigation
in
federal
district
court,”

Carla
Rydholm,
general
manager
and
head
of
product
at
Lex
Machina,
told
me
during
a
briefing
this
week.
“Now
we
have
the
ability
to
provide
coverage
of
every
commercially
relevant
case.”

While
analytics
by
practice
area
remain
the
primary
focus
of
the
platform,
it
now
allows
users
to
compare
analytics
across
all
federal
cases,
without
having
to
select
a
case
type,
and
then
drill
down
into
more
granular
data
based
on
courts,
judges,
counsel,
parties,
and
other
filters.

In
addition
to
tagging
cases
based
on
the
22
primary
practice
areas,
Lex
Machina
has
now
added
tagging
for
another
five
categories:
admiralty/maritime,
forfeiture/penalty,
FOIA,
immigration,
and
RICO.

Cases
that
do
not
fit
within
any
of
these
practice
areas
will
be
tagged
as
uncategorized,
but
users
will
be
able
to
view
the
federal
nature-of-suit
code
that
was
applied
to
the
original
filing.

This
enhanced
data
set
is
also
available
through
the
litigation
analytics
feature
of
the
legal
research
platform
Lexis+.
Lex
Machina
is
owned
by
LexisNexis.

The
significance
of
this
is
that
users
will
get
a
truly
complete
picture
of
federal
court
analytics
that
encompass
not
just
the
85%
of
cases
previously
covered
but
100%
of
cases.
That
means
that
when
they
are
exploring
analytics
for
factors
such
as
outcomes,
damages,
or
remedies,
they
are
getting
the
comprehensive
view.

Key
to
Lex
Machina’s
analytics
is
how
the
company
processes
the
raw
case
data
after
collection
—
cleaning,
tagging,
coding
and
enhancing
the
data
so
that
it
can
be
analyzed
across
a
number
of
parameters.

It
allows
users
to
explore
analytics
based
on
entities
—
judges,
courts,
law
firms,
attorneys
and
parties
—
and
by
outcomes
—
case
resolutions,
timing,
damages,
findings,
remedies
and
motion
metrics.

Lex
Machina
evolved
out
of
a
research
project
launched
in
2006
at
Stanford
Law
School
to
collect
and
analyze
data
on
patent
cases.
Since
its

acquisition
by
LexisNexis
in
2015,
it
has
steadily
added
more
practice
areas,
expanded
into
state
courts,

added
analytics
for
federal
courts
of
appeal,
and

added
Litigation
Footprint
for
visualizing
litigation.

With
this
latest
traunch
of
cases,
Lex
Machina
can
now
provide
these
outcome-driven
analytics,
including
damages
and
case
resolutions,
for
over
3.7
million
federal
district
civil
cases,
based
on
data
from
17.5
million
documents.

Along
with
this
release,
Lex
Machina
has
updated
certain
tools
and
added new
capabilities
that
it
says
will
allow
for
more
depth,
detail,
and
nuance.
A
new
“Custom
Columns”
feature
streamlines
the
creation,
sharing,
and
export
of
customized
reports,
it
says,
while
a
new
“Findings
Search”
feature
allows
users
to
search
findings
within
a
specific
practice
area
for
findings
that
are
most
relevant
to
their
own
case
and
practice.

I
am
an

avowed
fan
of
the
MTV/Bunim
Murray
reality
TV
universe.
The
Real
World
created
a
genre
out
of
whole
cloth,
and
Road
Rules
built
on
the
brand.
But
it’s
The
Challenge
—
currently
in
its
40th
season
—
that
cemented
its
place
in
the
zeitgeist
with
returning
“characters”
and
relationships
that
evolve
over
the
course
of
years.
And
that
formula
has
created
some
stars
—
some
have
taken
their
fame
to

other

reality
TV

franchises,
some
have
charted
a

course
in
comedy,
others
are

actors
in

film
and
TV.
There
are

models,

wrestlers,
and

TV
hosts
in
The
Challenge
alumni
ranks.
But
if
you
thought
the
strangest
2024
development
for
a
Challenge
alum
was

Theo
Von
playing
presidential
kingmaker,
I
have
some
bad
news
for
you.

Last
night,
Donald
Trump

selected
his
pick
for
Transportation
Secretary.
And,
as
you
probably
guessed
from
the
intro,
he
tapped
a
former
MTV
star.

Sean
Duffy
first
came
into
the
public
eye
during
the
sixth
season
of
The
Real
World,
the
Boston
edition.
He
was
a
competitive
lumberjack
who
clashed
with
some
of
his
more
liberal
roommates.
After
his
season
ended,
Duffy
went
on
to
compete
on
The
Challenge
where
he
met
his
future
wife,
star
of
the
San
Francisco
RW
season,
Rachael
Campos.
Duffy
and
Campos
went
on
to
have
nine
children
and
quickly
got
on
the
express
train
to
right-wing
stardom.
Campos
tried
her
hand
as
the
conservative
on
The
View
before
finding
a
home
on
Fox
News.
Duffy
got
that
law
degree
he’d
been
eyeing
(from
William
Mitchell
College
of
Law)
before
starting
his
career
as
a
prosecutor.
He
then
turned
to
politics
as
a
member
of
the
House
of
Representatives,
representing
Wisconsin’s
7th
Congressional
District.
He
left
that
role
to
spend
time
with
his
family
after
learning
his
ninth
child
had
health
complications.
From
there,
Duffy
returned
to
TV
as
a
host
on
Fox
Business.
All
of
which
brings
us
to
last
night’s
announcement,
giving
Duffy
the
nod
as
the
head
of
Transportation.

Listen,
we
live
in
a
world
where
Matt
Gaetz
—
a
man

—
is
being
put
up
at
Attorney
General.
And
a
Fox
News
host
got

the
nod
as
Secretary
of
Defense.
A

reality
TV
star
in
the
Cabinet?
Seems
entirely
on
brand
for
Trump
2.0.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

The
Justice
Department
is
Trump’s
white
whale,
and
like
Captain
Ahab,
Trump
is
determined
to
get
even.

—

Stephen
Gillers,
an
ethics
professor
at
New
York
University
Law
School,
in
comments
given
to

NBC
News,
on
President-elect
Donald
Trump’s
reported
plans
to
seek
revenge
against
those
who
may
have
scorned
him
within
the
Department
of
Justice.
“Trump
aims
to
neutralize
sources
of
power
that
may
impede
him,”
Gillers
said.
“That
includes
the
law
and
legal
institutions.
He
will
tolerate
no
interference
when
the
department’s
decisions
will
benefit
Trump
and
his
buddies
or
when
its
power
can
be
deployed
to
retaliate
against
his
enemies.”

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

Clarence
Thomas
will
become
the
longest
serving
justice
in
Supreme
Court
history
if
he
holds
out
until
mid-2028.
And
despite
the
fervent
wishes
of
conservatives
and
—
probably
especially
—
Thomas’s
likely
replacement
Judge
James
Ho,
the
Court’s
senior
justice
seems
likely
to
gun
for
the
record.

And
one
of
the
perks
enjoyed
by
folks
serving
long
tenures
in
important
jobs
is
a
fancy
oil
portrait.
So
it’s
no
surprise
that
Thomas
is

in
the
process
of
having
his
legacy
portrait
done.
For
this
task,
he’s
chosen
Igor
V.
Babailov,
an
accomplished
portrait
artist
whose
past
subjects
include
Thomas’s
colleague

Samuel
Alito,

Vladimir
Putin,
and

Prince
Andrew.

Honestly,
it’s
a
little
jolting
to
see
any
picture
of
Prince
Andrew
these
days
that

doesn’t
involve
Jeffrey
Epstein.

For
the
highest
of
comedy,
check
out
the

George
W.
Bush,
where
America’s
most
destructive
nepo
baby
is
posed
as
the
fifth
head
on
Mount
Rushmore,
juxtaposing
the
man
who
said
“you
can
fool
all
of
the
people
some
of
the
time…”
with
the
man
who
said,
“fool
me
once
shame
on
you,
fool
me
—
you
can’t
get fooled
again.”

It’s
not
like
Babailov
uniquely
seeks
out
cartoonish
villains
for
his
portfolio.
For
example,
his
Putin
portrait
was
commissioned
as
a
gift
from
the
Canadian
government.
But
still,
it’s
a
man
with
a
history
of
capturing
some
of
the
world’s
most
punchable
people
for
posterity.

While
we
wait
on
the
Thomas
portrait,
Babailov
offers
some
tantalizing
peeks
at
the
process,
including
some
revealing
detail
work
on
the
bookshelf
being
composed
as
a
backdrop.

Not
quite
sure
what
“The
Law”
is
or
why
it
would
be
neatly
held
in
one
relatively
thin
volume.
His
autobiography,

My
Grandfather’s
Son,
and
his
hagiography, 

Created
Equal,
make
appearances.
The
latter
work
was
a
pillar
of
a
public
relations
blitz
from
conservatives
trying
to
recuperate
Thomas’s
reputation
and
gave
birth
to
a
documentary
film
of
the
same
name
funded
by
right-wing
activists.
Was
FedSoc
honcho
Leonard
Leo
at
the
center
of
raising
over
a
million
and
a
half
from
conservative
non-profits
for
this
effort?
Could
Harlan
Crow
have
been
involved?

You’d
better
believe
it!

The
Bible
shows
up,
presumably
the
Trump
version
that
includes
the
nation’s
founding
documents…
or
at
least
the
parts
that

the
conservative
legal
movement
care
about.
And
finally,

Littlest
Suffering
Souls,
a
book
whose
author,
Austin
Ruse,
president
of
the
Catholic
Family
&
Human
Rights
Institute,
once

wrote,
“Women
should
not
be
able
to
vote
until
they
are
married.”

It’s
unclear
if
other
specific
titles
will
be
added
before
the
portrait’s
completion
or
if
the
rest
become
nondescript
“law-looking
books.”
Any
thoughts
on
what
the
artist
should
add?
The

Bluebook
perhaps?

Blackstone’s
Commentaries?

Winds
of
Winter?

We’ll
just
have
to
wait
and
see!

---

Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.

It
was
probably
inevitable
that
Alex
Jones
would
wind
up
suing
the
Sandy
Hook
parents.
After
years
of
calling
them
crisis
actors
who
faked
the
murders
of
their
own
children
and
encouraging
his
deranged
supporters
to
harass
them
for
years
on
end,
Jones
is
now
demanding
that

they
make
him
whole
for
his
pain
and
suffering.

Jones,
a
sentient
shitpost
who
is
rapidly
transforming
into
a
case
of
explosive
diarrhea,
is
trying
desperately
to
fend
off
the
sale
of
his
company
Free
Speech
Systems
to
the
owners
of
the
satirical
website
The
Onion.
And
because
the
parents
of
the
Sandy
Hook
kids
are
supportive
of
the
sale,
he’s
happily
willing
to
paint
a
target
on
their
backs
again.

The
issue
is
the
structure
of
the
bid
package,
in
which
the
parents
who
sued
in
Connecticut
agreed
to
disclaim
some
of
their
proceeds
in
favor
of
the
parents
who
sued
in
Texas.
Because
of
the
gross
disparity
in
their
damages
awards
—
$1.4
billion
compared
to
$50
million
—
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
are
legally
entitled
to
97
percent
of
the
proceeds
of
the
sale.
To
ensure
that
the
Texas
plaintiffs
were
better
off
under
a
deal
with
The
Onion’s
parent
company
Global
Tetrahedron
than
with
the
Jones-aligned
bidder,
a
shell
company
calling
itself
First
United
American
Companies
LLC
(FUAC),
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
agreed
to
disclaim
enough
of
their
share
to
make
the
Texas
plaintiffs
$100,000
better
off.

By
my
math,
that’s
about
$537,500.

The
asset
transfer,
along
with
a
promise
to
share
future
ad
revenues
with
the
Sandy
Hook
families,
convinced
Chapter
7
Trustee
Christopher
Murray
that
The
Onion’s
offer
maximized
value
for
all
creditors,
despite
the
fact
that
it
was
lower
than
the
competing
bid.
FUAC
is
already
challenging
this
decision,
filing
a
highly
incendiary

motion
to
disqualify
Global
Tetrahedron
that
made
allegations
of
gross
impropriety
against
Murray.
Murray
responded
with
a

threat
to
seek
Rule
11
sanctions
against
FUAC’s
lawyer
Walter
Cicack.

Jones
has
been
screaming
bloody
murder
on
his
show
about
the
Justice
Department
under
Trump
throwing
Murray
and
The
Onion’s
CEO
Ben
Collins
in
jail,
as
well
as
predicting
that
Elon
Musk
is
going
to
ride
to
his
rescue.
(He’s
not.)
And
last
night
he
went
one
further
and
filed
an
absolutely

batshit
complaint
against
Murray,
Global
Tetrahedron,
and
the
Connecticut
Sandy
Hook
parents
demanding
that
US
Bankruptcy
Judge
Christopher
Lopez
stop
the
sale,
declare
FUAC
the
winner,
and
order
the
putative
defendants
to:

a.
Cease
to
use,
directly
or
indirectly,
any
Jones
IP
Rights;
b.
Cease
from
using
any
reference
to
Alex
Jones
in
their
business
or
operations
or
suggesting
or
inferring
that
they
have
any
rights
to
use
of
Alex
Jones’s
name
or
persona;
c.
Return
to
the
business
offices
of
FSS
and
to
the
control
of
Alex
Jones,
who
is
the
duly
elected
Manager
of
FSS,
all
assets
of
FSS
and/or
Alex
Jones
that
have
been
taken;
d.
Identify
to
Alex
Jones
all
assets
(tangible
or
intangible)
of
FSS
and/or
Alex
Jones
known
to
have
been
taken
and/or
secreted;
e.
Cease
and
refrain
from
(i)
any
interference
with
the
operation
and
management
by
Alex
Jones
of
the
business
of
FSS,
including
InfoWars,
and
(ii)
dealing
with
any
and
all
third
parties
in
matters
that
relate
to
or
concern
the
assets
of
FSS
and/or
Alex
Jones,
without
the
express
written
permission
of
this
Court;
f.
Cease
to
advise
or
publish
that
any
of
the
Enjoined
Parties
owns
or
has
acquired
the
right
to
own,
any
assets
or
business
of
FSS
and/or
Alex
Jones,
including
without
limitation
any
Jones
IP
Rights;
and
g.
Notify
in
writing
all
persons
to
whom
any
of
the
Enjoined
Parties
has
told
they
own
or
have
acquired
the
right
to
own,
any
assets
or
business
of
FSS
and/or
Alex
Jones,
including
without
limitation
any
Jones
IP
Rights,
and
advise
them
that
statements
previously
made
to
the
contrary
were
made
in
error.

Leave
aside
the
whole

prior
restraint
thing.
How
Murray
is
supposed
to
simultaneously
convey
the
assets
to
FUAC
and
return
them
to
Jones
—
who
voluntarily
filed
for
Chapter
7
liquidation!
—
is
not
entirely
clear.
But
this
document
was
drafted
by

apparently
experienced
bankruptcy
counsel
who
are
unaware
of
the Barton
doctrine,
which
bars
suits
against
a
bankruptcy
trustee
without
leave
of
the
court.
They
also
seem
to
think
that
media
defendants
have
some
kind
of
magical
shield
of
invincibility
when
it
comes
to
issues
of
public
importance,
so
the
trail
court
verdicts
should
be
treated
as
presumptively
overturned.
And
if
Jones
hadn’t
defaulted
in
both
courts,
perhaps
he
could
have
made
that
point
to
the
jury.
Anyway,
it
violates
Jones’s
free
speech
rights
to
sell
his
IP
to
gun
control
advocates,
and
he
intends
to
seek
monetary
damages.
Also,
the
judgments
against
him
are
unfair
because something
something
Hillary
Clinton.

And
if
that
wasn’t
nutty
enough,
Texas
Attorney
General
Ken
Paxton
has

entered
the
chat.
LOL,
what
even
is
federalism,

amirite?

Alexander
E.
Jones
and
Official
Committee
Of
Unsecured
Creditors [Docket
via
Court
Listener]

---

Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Once
the
Diddy
hit
the
fan,
it
was
only
a
matter
of
time
before
other
big
names
got
wrapped
up
in
it.
We
were
promised
as
much
—
Tony
Buzbee

promised
to
find
the
silent
accomplices
and
enablers
who
undergirded
Diddy’s
alleged
freakoffs.
But
the
line
between
tracking
down
collaborators
and
alleged
extortion
isn’t
always
clear.
Buzbee’s
tactics
have
resulted
in
an
unnamed
plaintiff
accusing
him
of
inflicting
emotional
distress
and
extortion.

Law360 has
coverage:

“Plaintiff
presently
faces
a
gun
to
his
head
—
either
repeatedly
pay
an
exorbitant
sum
of
money
to
stop
defendants
from
the
wide
publication
of
wildly
false
allegations
of
sexual
assault
that
would
subject
plaintiff
to
opprobrium
and
irreparably
harm
plaintiff’s
reputation,
family,
career
and
livelihood,
or
else
face
the
threat
of
an
untold
number
of
civil
suits
and
financial
and
personal
ruin,”
the
complaint
says.
“The
theme
of
defendants’
statements
and
correspondence
is
the
immediate
and
extensive
threat
of
exposure
if
plaintiff
fails
to
make
a
sufficient
offer
of
money.
This
is
textbook
extortion.”

There
isn’t
enough
information
at
the
moment
to
know
who
is
in
the
wrong
here.
Diddy
is
a
great
example
of
how
easy
it
can
be
to

take
the
moral
high
road
and
deny
any
involvement
or
wrongdoing
right
up

until
CNN
releases
video
evidence
to
the
public.
Buzbee
described
his
letter
to
the
plaintiff
as
a
request
for
confidential
mediation.
The
nature
of
the
correspondence
may
ultimately
be
determined
by
a
judge
and
jury.

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

A
room
buzzing
with
energy,
filled
with
the
best
and
brightest
minds
in
IP
law.
The
air
is
electric
with
ideas,
and
the
conversations
are
nothing
short
of
enlightening.
This
was
my
experience
at
the
Anaqua
Client
Experience
Conference,
where
I
had
the
honor
of
delivering
a
keynote
and,
more
importantly,
soaking
in
invaluable
wisdom
from
in-house
IP
professionals.
Their
stories
and
insights
were
a
treasure
trove
of
practical
knowledge,
and
I’m
excited
to
share
three
key
takeaways
that
can
help
you
and
your
team
thrive
in
this
dynamic
field.

Deliberate
Upskilling:
A
Necessity,
Not
An
Option

Let’s
start
with
a
story.
I
met
an
in-house
counsel
who,
despite
her
impressive
credentials,
felt
she
was
falling
behind
in
the
rapidly
evolving
tech
landscape.
Her
solution?
Deliberate
upskilling.
Here’s
how
she
approached
it:

• 
  Identify
  Skills
  Gaps.
  She
  conducted
  a
  skills
  gap
  analysis
  for
  her
  team,
  identifying
  areas
  needing
  improvement
  to
  stay
  competitive
  and
  relevant.
• 
  Create
  A
  Learning
  Plan.
  She
  developed
  a
  structured
  plan
  to
  address
  these
  gaps.
  This
  included
  online
  courses,
  webinars,
  workshops,
  and
  in-house
  training
  sessions.
• 
  Encourage
  Continuous
  Learning.
  She
  fostered
  a
  culture
  where
  learning
  was
  a
  continuous
  process,
  encouraging
  team
  members
  to
  stay
  curious
  and
  seek
  knowledge
  proactively.

Her
deliberate
approach
to
upskilling
not
only
enhanced
her
team’s
capabilities
but
also
boosted
their
confidence,
positioning
them
as
leaders
in
the
field.

Beta-Testing
Partnerships:
Be
The
First
To
Innovate

Next,
let
me
introduce
you
to
an
IP
manager
who
shared
her
secret
to
staying
ahead
of
the
curve:
beta-testing
partnerships.
She
told
me
how
her
company
became
early
adopters
of
cutting-edge
tools,
giving
them
a
competitive
edge.
Here’s
her
strategy:

• 
  Build
  Relationships.
  She
  established
  strong
  relationships
  with
  tech
  providers,
  showing
  them
  her
  team
  was
  keen
  to
  collaborate
  and
  provide
  valuable
  feedback.
• 
  Volunteer
  For
  Beta
  Testing.
  She
  proactively
  offered
  her
  team
  as
  beta
  testers,
  gaining
  early
  access
  to
  new
  tools
  and
  influencing
  their
  development
  to
  better
  suit
  her
  company’s
  needs.
• 
  Evaluate
  And
  Implement.
  Her
  team
  carefully
  evaluated
  these
  new
  tools
  during
  the
  beta
  phase,
  implementing
  the
  ones
  that
  added
  value
  and
  enhanced
  their
  efficiency.

This
proactive
approach
not
only
kept
her
team
at
the
forefront
of
technological
advancements
but
also
fostered
a
culture
of
innovation
and
adaptability.

Scheduled
Learning
And
Reviews:
Consistency
Is
Key

Lastly,
I
met
a
general
counsel
who
swears
by
the
power
of
regular
learning
schedules
and
progress
reviews.
His
approach?
Rigorous
and
consistent.
Here’s
how
he
did
it:

• 
  Set
  A
  Learning
  Schedule.
  He
  dedicated
  specific
  times
  in
  his
  calendar
  for
  learning
  activities,
  ensuring
  his
  team
  could
  focus
  on
  professional
  development
  without
  interruptions.
• 
  Monthly
  Progress
  Reviews.
  He
  conducted
  monthly
  reviews
  to
  assess
  the
  progress
  of
  their
  learning
  initiatives,
  identifying
  what
  was
  working
  and
  what
  wasn’t,
  allowing
  for
  timely
  course
  corrections.
• 
  Align
  With
  Best
  Practices.
  He
  ensured
  their
  learning
  activities
  and
  reviews
  were
  aligned
  with
  current
  best
  practices,
  keeping
  his
  team
  at
  the
  forefront
  of
  the
  industry.

This
structured
approach
to
continuous
improvement
ensured
his
team
remained
agile,
knowledgeable,
and
ready
to
tackle
any
challenge
the
dynamic
world
of
IP
law
threw
at
them.

The
Anaqua
Client
Experience
Conference
was
more
than
just
an
event;
it
was
a
masterclass
in
practical
wisdom
from
in-house
IP
professionals.
Deliberate
upskilling,
beta-testing
partnerships,
and
scheduled
learning
and
reviews
are
three
strategies
that
stood
out,
providing
a
roadmap
to
staying
ahead
in
the
field
of
IP
law.
Remember,
continuous
learning
and
adaptation
are
your
best
allies
in
this
fast-paced
landscape.

So,
as
we
navigate
the
future,
let’s
stay
curious,
innovative,
and
committed
to
excellence.
Keep
learning,
keep
growing,
and
watch
your
team
thrive!

---

Olga
V.
Mack


is
a
Fellow
at
CodeX,
The
Stanford
Center
for
Legal
Informatics,
and
a
Generative
AI
Editor
at
law.MIT.
Olga
embraces
legal
innovation
and
had
dedicated
her
career
to
improving
and
shaping
the
future
of
law.
She
is
convinced
that
the
legal
profession
will
emerge
even
stronger,
more
resilient,
and
more
inclusive
than
before
by
embracing
technology.
Olga
is
also
an
award-winning
general
counsel,
operations
professional,
startup
advisor,
public
speaker,
adjunct
professor,
and
entrepreneur.
She
authored Get
on
Board:
Earning
Your
Ticket
to
a
Corporate
Board
Seat, Fundamentals
of
Smart
Contract
Security,
and  Blockchain
Value:
Transforming
Business
Models,
Society,
and
Communities. She
is
working
on
three
books:


Visual
IQ
for
Lawyers
(ABA
2024), The
Rise
of
Product
Lawyers:
An
Analytical
Framework
to
Systematically
Advise
Your
Clients
Throughout
the
Product
Lifecycle
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024),
and
Legal
Operations
in
the
Age
of
AI
and
Data
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024).
You
can
follow
Olga
on



LinkedIn


and
Twitter
@olgavmack.

Turley
Really
Wants
You
To
Put
Gaetz’s
17
Year
Old
Thing
Aside:

Loyalists
are
loyal
to
a
fault.

Harvard
Law
Students
Avoid
Getting
Pushed
For
Studying:

You’ll
never
guess
how
they
skirted
punishment!

Law
Firms
Sitting
Ringside:

Did
you
catch
these
firms
during
the
Paul-Tyson
bout?

Biglaw
Partner
Suspended
Over
Inappropriate
Contact
Allegations:

He
was
also
ordered
to
pay
£66,000.

You
Weren’t
Supposed
To
See
That:

Poor
in-house
email
security
has
firm
scrambling
over
what
junior
associates
saw.

I
don’t
have
many
tweets
that
automatically
come
to
mind
whenever
Ohio
is
mentioned,
but
the
two
that
do
should
cross
your
mind
whenever
Ohio’s
race
and
education
policy
decisions
pop
on
your
timeline:

Now
that
that’s
out
the
way,
5
law
schools
in
Ohio
just
dropped
their
race
based
scholarships
and
programs.

The
Center
Square
has
coverage:

Pressure
from
a
Columbus-based
policy
group
has
forced
five
university-based
Ohio
law
schools
to
stop
race-based
scholarship
or
internship
programs.

The
Buckeye
Institute
announced
law
schools
at
Cleveland
State,
Ohio
State,
Akron,
Cincinnati
and
Toledo
stopped
the
programs
after
it
announced
an
investigation.

Glad
that
groups
are
targeting
the
real
threat
to
our
democracy:
people
getting
money
so
they
can
attend
school!
The
impacted
schools
are
Cleveland
State,
Ohio
State,
Akron,
Cincinnati
and
Toledo.
They
won’t
be
the
last.
Public
universities
all
across
the
nation
are
likely
to
follow
suit
—
few
things
put
a
damper
on
solidarity
like
getting
sued
over
it.

Ohio
Law
Schools
Stop
Race-Based
Scholarships,
Programs
[The
Center
Square]

Earlier:

The
Affirmative
Action
Cases
Went
About
As
Well
As
You’d
Expect
Them
To.
What
Now?

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

“We
always
knew
the
guys
who
currently
run
InfoWars
were
going
to
take
this
badly
and
use
the
loss
to
fundraise
off
of
it,
and
they
did
not
disappoint,”
the
Onion’s
CEO
Ben
Collins

posted
on
Bluesky
last
week,
adding
that
“Buying
this
site
was
always
going
to
be
fun
later
on,
but
annoying
right
away.”
And
boy
was
he
ever
right!

Last
week
Chapter
7
bankruptcy
trustee
Christopher
Murray

announced
that
Global
Tetrahedron,
parent
company
of
The
Onion,
was
the
winning
bidder
in
the
auction
of
Free
Speech
Systems,
Alex
Jones’s
corporate
firehose
of
hate.
The
runner-up
bidder
was
a
company
called
First
United
American
Companies,
LLC,
which
would
appear
to
be
associated
with
one
of
FSS’s
suppliers.
FUAC’s
attorney
Walter
Cicack
previously

represented
Charlie
Cicack
in
this
case,
and
Charlie
is
described
by
the

New
York
Times
as

“an
entrepreneur
who
had
sold
products
through
Free
Speech
Systems
in
the
past”
and
then
“claimed
ignorance
of
the
relationship
and
then
deleted
references
to
Infowars
from
his
social
media
accounts”
when
the
paper
contacted
him.

At
an

emergency
status
conference
on
Thursday,
Walter
Cicack
protested
that
Murray,
the
trustee,
had
illegally
changed
the
terms
of
the
auction
and
colluded
with
the
Sandy
Hook
families
to
rig
the
auction
in
favor
of
a
party
who
put
less
cash
on
the
table.
And
US
Bankruptcy
Judge
Christopher
Lopez
appeared
sympathetic,
despite
Murray’s
protests
that
he’d
done
what
was
in
the
best
interests
of
all
the
creditors.

This
morning,
Cicack
filed
an

emergency
motion
to
disqualify
The
Onion’s
bid
on
the
theory
that
Murray
violated
the
court’s
winddown
order
authorizing
the
sale.
It
was
chock
full
of
highly
inflammatory
claims
that
Murray
acted
“in
complete
bad
faith
and
with
improper
collusion
with
the
Connecticut
Families.”

Within
an
hour,
Murray
docketed
a
two-page

preliminary
response
denying
the
“barrage
of
baseless
allegations,
selective
quoting
and
half-truths
in
FUAC’s
recent
filings”
and
“reserv[ing]
all
rights,
including
those
under
Federal
Rule
of
Civil
Procedure
11
and
Federal
Rule
of
Bankruptcy
Procedure
9011
regarding
the
duties
of
attorneys
who
sign
their
names
to
pleadings
in
this
Court.”

Then
this
afternoon,
Murray
filed
an expedited
motion
to
ratify
the
sale
making
clear
why
he
chose
The
Onion’s
bid,
even
though
it
was
for
less
cash
upfront.

Thanks
to
the
numerous
exhibits,
the
sealed
auction
negotiations
have
now
been
functionally
unsealed
(with
the
exception
of
the
identity
of
FUAC
and
its
funders).
FUAC’s

initial
bid
was
$1.2
million,
and
The
Onion’s
was

$1
million.
But
The
Onion’s
bid
included
a
Distributable
Proceeds
Waiver
by
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
in
favor
of
the
Texas
plaintiffs
addressing
a
rift
between
the
two
sets
of
Sandy
Hook
parents
that
opened
up
when
FSS
exited
Chapter
11
proceedings.

In
brief,
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
have
a
$1.4
billion
judgment;
and
the
Texas
plaintiffs
have
a
$50
million
judgment.
And
so,
under
a
pro
rata
distribution
of
assets,
the
Texas
plaintiffs
are
going
to
get
just
three
percent
of
the
payout.
And
so,
to
address
this
disparity,
while
simultaneously
ensuring
that
Jones
doesn’t
get
to
keep
the
company,
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
agreed
to
disclaim
as
much
of
the
sale
proceeds
as
necessary
to
make
the
Texas
plaintiffs
$100,000
better
off
than
they
would
be
under
the
second-place
bid.

To
the
extent
an
alternative
Qualified
Bid
is
submitted
by
a
third
party
that
consists
of
cash
consideration
in
a
higher
amount
than
the
Purchase
Price
set
forth
herein,
the
Connecticut
Families
commit
to
forego
receipt
of
the
Distributable
Proceeds
Waiver
Amount
(as
defined
herein),
and
shall
assign
the
Distributable
Proceeds
Waiver
Amount
to
the
Chapter
7
Trustee
for
the
benefit
of
all
other
unsecured
creditors
of
FSS.
The
waiver
described
in
this
section
(the
“Distributable
Proceeds
Waiver”)
is
intended
to
enhance
the
terms
of
this
Bid,
such
that
creditors
other
than
the
Connecticut
Families
will
receive
greater
cash
recovery
pursuant
to
this
Bid
than
they
would
under
an
alternative
Qualified
Bid,
notwithstanding
a
higher
cash
purchase
price.

Murray
went
back
to
both
FUAC
and
The
Onion
and
asked
them
to
submit
their
best
and
final
offers,
as
was
within
his
discretion
according
to
the
plain
language
of
Judge
Lopez’s
order
authorizing
the
sale.
Notably,
FUAC

did
not
object
at
the
time
to
the
change
in
procedures.

The
submissions
were
to
include
bids
on
multiple
different
lots,
in
varying
combinations,
since
the
assets
include
Infowars’
IP,
the
Infowars
store,
various
domain
names,
and
the
FSS’s
tangible
personal
property.

Goblinlove
dot
com???

This
appears
to
have
been
an
effort
to
extract
maximum
value
for
creditors
by
selling
the
IP
to
The
Onion,
and
the
store,
which
The
Onion
didn’t
care
much
about,
to
FUAC.

FUAC
came
back
with
a
bid
for
$3.5
million.
The
Onion’s
bid
was
$1.75
million.
But
it
was
accompanied
by
a
promise
from
the
Connecticut
families
to
disclaim
as
much
of
the
purchase
price
as
necessary
to
put
the
Texas
families
in
a
better
position
than
they
would
have
been
with
the
FUAC
deal,
even
if
FUAC
raised
its
offer
to
$7
million.

To
be
clear,
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
calculated
this
by
grossing
the
share
of
all
other
creditors
up
to
25
percent.
In
reality,
everyone
else’s
claims
against
the
Jones
estate
are
just
a
rounding
error
compared
to
the
$1.4
billion
plus
post-judgment
interest
the
Connecticut
plaintiffs
entitled
to.
And,
despite
Cicack’s
suggestion
that
The
Onion
was
bidding
with
“monopoly
money,”
the
Sandy
Hook
parents
will
get
a
continuing
share
of
the
ad
revenue
post-sale.

So
Murray,
exercising
his
broad
discretion
under
the
winddown
order
and
the
business
judgment
rule,
chose
the
offer
that
maximized
value
to
the
creditors,
even
though
it
was
not
the
deal
that
put
the
most
cash
on
the
table
up
front.

Presumably
he
will
respond
to
Cicack’s
attack
in
short
order.
Wonder
if
we’ll
find
out
exactly
which
goblinlover
is
behind
that
FUAC
bid
…

Alexander
E.
Jones
and
Official
Committee
Of
Unsecured
Creditors [Docket
via
Court
Listener]

---

Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.