small-logo
ProfessionalsCapabilitiesInsights & NewsCareersLocations
About UsAlumniOpportunity & InclusionPro BonoCorporate Social Responsibility
Stay Connected:
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube
Site Search

Capabilities 73 results

Practice Area

Derivatives & Structured Products

Winston represents swap dealers, major swap participants, financial intermediaries, hedge funds, national exchanges, and end-users in a broad array of derivative transactions ranging from highly structured transactions to more traditional trading or hedging transactions, and in regulatory and enforcement issues related to commodities and derivatives....Read more

Practice Area

Product Liability & Mass Torts

Major multinational companies trust Winston to defend their products and reputations in high-profile, high-stakes product liability and mass tort claims. Our Product Liability & Mass Torts Practice is one of the industry’s most seasoned, with a deep bench of experienced lawyers and a unique combination of extensive trial experience and expansive technical knowledge....Read more

Practice Area

Labor & Employment

Our Labor & Employment Practice is one of the largest and most experienced practices among the country’s multi-disciplined law firms. Our attorneys represent global employers of all types and sizes—ranging from the Fortune 100 to privately held startups—often serving as national, regional, or preferred counsel to many of these major employers....Read more

Insights & News 2,380 results

Client Alert

|

June 13, 2025

|

2 Min Read

Federal Circuit Reverses US$200M+ Jury Verdicts Because Asserted Claims Are Unpatentable Under § 101

According to 35 U.S.C. § 101, “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof” may be patentable. Courts and litigants often struggle in determining what falls outside this scope—i.e., what is unpatentable subject matter. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals dealt with this issue in a series of appeals between USAA v. PNC Bank (CAFC Nos. 2023-1639, 2023-1778, 2023-1866, 2025-1276, 2025-1277, and 2025-1341), held that the claims in the patents at issue recite unpatentable subject matter, and reversed the entries of judgment for the US$218M and US$4.3M jury verdicts that issued out of the Eastern District of Texas.

Client Alert

|

June 12, 2025

|

6 Min Read

Safeguarding Public Health Grants: How States Fought Against Abrupt Federal Funding Cuts

On May 16, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr.[1] As a result, HHS must continue to provide access to healthcare-related funding to the 23 plaintiff States and the District of Columbia (the States) after attempting to unilaterally terminate access to those funds, and it may not “tak[e] any action to reinstitute” the terminations “for the same or similar reasons.”[2]...Read more

In the Media

|

June 12, 2025

|

1 Min Read

Bobby Malhotra Discusses Tensions Between Discovery Requirements and Consumer Privacy Rights Bloomberg Law

Winston & Strawn partner Bobby Malhotra was quoted in a Bloomberg Law article discussing the OpenAI Inc. copyright lawsuit and legal debate over how to balance a court’s need for information against protecting individuals’ personal data. OpenAI has been challenging a court order to preserve its ChatGPT outputs in a precedent-setting copyright case, claiming the order threatens hundreds of millions of its users’ privacy rights. The first of its kind case will show how courts will weigh legal questions against protecting the privacy of large amounts of personal information in AI-related litigation. ...Read more
View All Insights & News

Other Results 40 results

Site Content

What Is Specific Causation?

Specific causation is the legal and scientific determination of whether the product in question was the direct cause of a plaintiff's specific injury. While general causation inquires whether a broader connection exists between a product and a type of harm, a specific causation assessment focuses on the unique circumstances surrounding a particular plaintiff's case. It typically requires expert testimony demonstrating that the alleged defect or issue in the product was responsible for the specific injuries suffered by the plaintiff. Alternative explanations for the plaintiff’s specific injuries must also be ruled out—typically via a differential etiology—for specific causation to be established....Read more

Site Content

What Is General Causation?

In the product liability context, general causation is the legal and scientific determination of whether the product in question has the inherent capability to cause the alleged injury under certain circumstances. Establishment of general causation is a critical aspect of a plaintiff’s case, and typically requires scientific evidence, such as epidemiology or toxicology, and expert testimony to establish a causal connection between the product’s design, manufacturing, or warnings and the injury or injuries at issue. As contrasted to specific causation, the focus in a general causation inquiry is on whether the product or exposure, as a general matter, can cause the type of injury claimed by the plaintiff. A general causation inquiry does not assess any facts unique to a particular plaintiff....Read more

Law Glossary

What Is Workplace Privacy Law?

Workplace privacy law involves the legal questions that arise as employers monitor their employees’ activities. Companies may monitor through visual surveillance, such as cameras, and electronic surveillance, and email audits. Businesses monitor to protect confidential information and to help prevent behavioral violations. Employers have broad rights to copy and monitor email sent over company electronic systems and to view these emails as business property. Emails can be monitored based on a number of business principles, including to encourage productivity and discourage illegal activity. Regarding surveillance, employees are allowed reasonable expectations of privacy in areas such as bathrooms. Legal issues may arise when hidden cameras are placed in work areas where employees are not aware of the surveillance....Read more
Logo
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube

Copyright © 2025. Winston & Strawn LLP

AlumniCorporate Transparency Act Task ForceDEI Compliance Task ForceEqual Rights AmendmentLaw GlossaryThe Oval UpdateWinston MinutePrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyFraud & Scam AlertsNoticesSubscribeAttorney Advertising