Podcasts about mintz levin

Joseph Miller, Co-Chair, Antitrust Practice, Mintz Levin, and Holden Brooks, Partner, McGuireWoods, discuss recent developments in the health care antitrust space. They cover the DOJ's health care monopolies task force, private equity in health care, Hart-Scott-Rodino changes, the FTC's final rule on non competes, state statutes, Indiana's pre-transaction review law, and entrenchment in the health care market. Joseph and Holden spoke about this topic at AHLA's 2024 Advising Providers: Legal Strategies for AMCs, Physicians, and Hospitals, in New Orleans, LA.To learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit americanhealthlaw.org.

For a long time, I've been meaning to invite a judge onto Counsel to Counsel to talk about judicial careers.  Going on the bench is a logical next step for many litigators and I wanted to speak to a judge who could offer some practical wisdom on the subject. When I met Paul Wilson at an ABA conference in late 2022, I realized right away that I had a great prospect.  At the time, Paul was still sitting on the bench, so we decided to wait until he reached mandatory retirement. Paul is in fact now retired; but he remains very active in a number of law related activities. In this episode, Paul shares his wisdom on judicial careers.  What does it mean to transition from litigator to judge?  What are the pluses?  What are the potential minuses?  And how do you position yourself for a judgeship? In the Spring of 2023, The Honorable Paul Wilson retired from the Massachusetts Superior Court, the highest trial court in the Commonwealth.  He sat for over a decade on the Superior Court after being in private practice for 30 years at the law firm of Mintz Levin. Paul spent most of his career doing real estate, land use, and environmental litigation.  He has always had a strong commitment to public service and has received a number of awards for his pro bono and volunteer efforts.

We Are a Nation of Immigrants. The host for this show is Chang Wang. The guest is Susan Cohen. Susan Cohen is a leading immigration lawyer in the US, the recipient of dozens of awards by prominent organizations, and Chair of Mintz Levin's Immigration Practice. In 2017, Susan helped to lead a Mintz team that worked with the ACLU of Massachusetts and others to obtain a temporary restraining order on the Travel Ban. Through her pro bono work, she has helped many immigrants obtain asylum. In her newly published book Journeys from There to Here: Stories of Immigrant Trials, Triumphs, and Contributions, Susan Cohen speaks from the front lines and shares her insight, honesty and wisdom on the immigration system in the US. The ThinkTech YouTube Playlist for this show is https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQpkwcNJny6m0sDYgbpbsi65EHVp8ynG8 Please visit our ThinkTech website at https://thinktechhawaii.com and see our Think Tech Advisories at https://thinktechadvisories.blogspot.com.

Counterpunch's Joshua Frank joins Ralph to discuss his new book, “Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America” about the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State— the Cold War plutonium manufacturing facility that even after a $677 billion taxpayer clean-up bill still leaks radioactivity. And immigration lawyer extraordinaire, Susan Cohen, regales us about her experience representing asylum seekers and refugees as chronicled in her book “Journey From There to Here: Stories of Immigrant Trials, Triumphs and Contributions.” Plus, Ralph makes one final pitch before the midterms for “Winning America.”Joshua Frank is an investigative journalist and the managing editor of the political magazine CounterPunch. He is also an author— his latest book is Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America.”Everyone would agree that any amount of money should be spent to clean this place up (Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State), but if it's lining the pockets of private corporations and the job's not getting done, then something's wrong.Joshua Frank, author of Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in AmericaThat's their answer (to radioactive waste)—tarps. They don't have an answer. Because it's a very technical, very laborious process. And, I would argue, takes more ingenuity in figuring out how to clean this up than it did to produce it in the first place.Joshua Frank, author of Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in AmericaSusan Cohen is an immigration attorney and founding Chair of Mintz Levin's Immigration Practice. She is president of the board of the Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project, and led a team working with the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts to obtain a temporary restraining order on Trump's 2017 Travel Ban. She is the author of Journeys From There to Here: Stories of Immigrant Trials, Triumphs and Contributions.The fact that there are so many authoritarian regimes and corrupt regimes that we have had a hand in supporting over the years—where people can't get justice when they've been egregiously harmed, or where the facts are evident and there's not a question about what happened— is just another indication of the kinds of intolerable life situations that people face in these countries where they truly have to escape for their very lives.Susan Cohen, author of Journeys From There to Here: Stories of Immigrant Trials, Triumphs and ContributionsThe stark choice on November 8th is between a fascist/autocratic party and one that supports a major social safety net for tens of millions of Americans and their children. For anybody who says, “What about third parties?” I say, “Go for it.” But you know what's going to happen on November 8th— it's either going to be the Republican or the Democratic candidates for the duopoly. And there's never been a bigger gap in domestic policy— they're very similar on empire— than at the present time.Ralph Nader Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Today I talk to William Hicks, co-chair of securities and capital markets at Mintz Levin. We discuss the state of the capital markets, financing options for companies and the challenges companies face in this market.

Susan Cohen on Immigrants and Immigration. The hosts for this show are Jay Fidell and Chang Wang. The guest is Susan Cohen. Susan Cohen is a leading immigration lawyer in the US, the recipient of dozens of awards by prominent organizations, and Chair of Mintz Levin's Immigration Practice. In 2017, Susan helped to lead a Mintz team that worked with the ACLU of Massachusetts and others to obtain a temporary restraining order on the Travel Ban. Through her pro bono work, she has helped many immigrants obtain asylum. In her newly published book Journeys from There to Here: Stories of Immigrant Trials, Triumphs, and Contributions, Susan Cohen speaks from the front lines and shares her insight, honesty and wisdom on the immigration system in the US. The ThinkTech YouTube Playlist for this show is https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQpkwcNJny6lzgEBW1TmyJazw3dZag-eU

Matt Simpson of Mintz Levin discussed his transition from peace negotiator to M&A lawyer, why he enjoys the middle market, what he's learned from advising reps and warranties insurers and how he finds serenity on sailboats in the latest edition of Drinks With The Deal.  

Conversations with the MarketPlace presents a conversation with Ian Hammel, Member with Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, and Popeo, P.C. One of the benefits of working with hospitals from across the country is meeting passionate people who are committed to providing the best advice, counsel, and strategies to healthcare organizations to ensure their financial viability. Ian is such a person. Ian is a member of the Mintz bankruptcy and restructuring team and maintains a national commercial restructuring practice. He represents indenture trustees, bondholders, noteholders, and other sophisticated creditors in bankruptcy, receivership, and other out-of-court and in-court matters. Ian has represented indenture trustees and bondholders in resolving acute care hospital bond defaults in 14 states, including a dozen acute care hospital bankruptcy matters. During this conversation, Ian shares his industry insights, details issues faced by hospitals in light of the pandemic, and provides suggestions to improve financial viability. Topics covered include: • Explains the role of a legal advisor to healthcare organizations. • Details the period when a legal advisor typically gets involved with a hospital credit • Discusses the role a legal advisor plays in working with both the hospital and bondholders to achieve a satisfactory solution to their related set of issues • Illustrates how an organization identifies and organizes the “right team” to address and resolve issues • Reviews how a healthcare organization can assess the qualifications of their team • Details the importance of creating trust with the bondholders If you have questions, please contact us at jbehn@warbirdcp.com. Ian can be contacted at iahammel@mintz.com.

Immigrants innovate. Kendall Square in Cambridge or Silicon Valley wouldn't be what they are today without the innovation and ingenuity of immigrants. But the dense and convoluted immigration system doesn't always allow for that retention of skill and talent. This week on JobMakers, Host Denzil Mohammed talks with Jeff Goldman, immigration attorney and Chair of Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker's Advisory Council on Immigrants and Refugees, about how best to ensure that highly skilled and innovative immigrants can remain in the U.S., start companies, and create jobs for Americans. Jeff co-founded the Massachusetts Global Entrepreneur in Residence program for immigrant university students to continue learning, teaching, and innovating. Jeff sees how much skilled immigrants add to our economic vibrancy and innovative edge, and he's also keenly aware of the tremendous impact on our daily lives of undocumented immigrant workers and what Massachusetts has done to enable them to thrive.Guest:Jeff Goldman practices exclusively in the areas of business and family immigration law. He has more than two decades of extensive experience representing startup to Fortune 1000 technology, life science and medical device companies, as well as families, in all visa and permanent residency matters. Jeff is passionate about entrepreneurship, families and the innovation economy. After over a decade leading the immigration law sections at Mintz Levin and Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, Jeff opened his own practice in Salem and Cambridge, Massachusetts and San Mateo, California.

Joe Miller and Bruce Sokler, Co-Chairs of Mintz Levin's Antitrust Practice, discuss President Biden's July 9 executive order, which called for a government-wide focus on antitrust competition issues and identified 72 initiatives across several industries. They provide an overview of the aspects of the executive order that are of particular importance to the health care industry, including wage and labor issues, hospital mergers, and pharmaceutical issues. From AHLA's Antitrust Practice Group.Watch the full conversation here.

Lawyer and magician Sara Crasson talks about Flavors of Magic, the virtual magic show she created in 2020 to highlight the diversity of the magic community. This is the first of four episodes following Flavors of Magic as it develops from a virtual event to an in-person live production.   Sara is a Law Clerk to a New York State Supreme Court Justice. Previously she worked in private practice at Mintz Levin and the Pillsbury law firm covering intellectual property disputes.   Sara is the official “Resourceress” of the Society of American Magicians (S.A.M.), the world's oldest international magicians' organization, and sits on their Ethics Committee.  Sara also produces “Flavors of Magic,” a show that highlights the diversity of the magic community.   
Sara is the author of Own Your Magic: A Magician's Guide to Protecting Your Intellectual Property. The New York Law Journal called her “the leading authority on how IP law applies to magic.”   Links from the episode:   Flavors of Magic - Free Virtual Shows and soon-to-be LIVE Shows: www.flavorsofmagic.com   Sara Crasson Instagram @magicianatlaw: https://www.instagram.com/magicianatlaw/?hl=en   College of Magic - Capetown, South Africa: https://www.collegeofmagic.com/   Omar Olusion - Flavors Creative Team: https://omarolusion.com/   Rogue - Flavors Creative Team: https://www.roguethemagician.com/   Eve of Destruction - One of Sara's Favorite Events: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mu3qDFSMpfg&ab_channel=JohnDiMartino   The Tank: https://thetanknyc.org/   Brown Paper Tickets: https://www.brownpapertickets.com/browse.html   ...   Interview by Ethan Steimel   Become a patron at: www.patreon.com/artisticfinance   www.artisticfinance.com instagram.com/artisticfinance   tiktok.com/artisticfinance twitter.com/ethansteimel facebook.com/artisticfinance youtube.com/artisticfinance

As Tom records from an undisclosed location, he and Jay are back to take a look at this week's stories top compliance and ethics stories which caught their interest on This Week in FCPA in the Live from Portland edition. Stories Tom takes up the call for Design Thinking to be used in compliance. Part 1-the steps in design thinking. Part 2-using design thinking to operationalize compliance. Part 3-into your compliance program. I screen, You screen, We all screen (but not for ice cream). Szilvia Andriasik in the FCPA Blog. The pandemic redefined the role of the GC. Did it do the same for the CCO. Abbott Martin and Rosie Griffin in How to train managers in COI. Jeff Kaplan in COI Blog. The Bribery Act at 10. Neil Hodge in Compliance Week (sub req'd) Expanding your DD horizons for ESG. Alek Chance In Navex Global's Risk and Compliance Matters. Upgrading your compliance program in 5 steps. Joe Murphy in Compliance Week (Sub Req'd) Is your training sticky? Gio Gallo in CCI. Using data analytics to uncover anomalies. Jessica Ellsworth in CCI. Internally communicating about cyber security issues. Davis Polk lawyers in the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Podcasts and Events Career Can Do, the latest edition to the Compliance Podcast Network, premiers this week. Recruiting guru Mary Ann Faremouth discusses all facets of the hiring process. In Episode 1, she interviews Jessica Levine. In Integrity Through Compliance, AMI's Dionne Lomaxspeaks with Joe Miller, the co-chair of Mintz Levin's antitrust practice. They focus on recent developments in antitrust compliance — specifically, compliance with government consent decrees and what might be occurring behind the scenes at federal enforcement agencies once a company has settled antitrust charges. This week on Greetings and Felicitations, Tom is joined by Ben Locwin to look at some of the science behind Star Trek, the Original Series. Mirror Mirror and Transporters, Where No Man Has Gone Before and Phasers; The Naked Time and Warp Drive; Tomorrow is Yesterday and Black Holes, White Holes, and Wormholes; and Journey to Babel and the Medicine of TOS. A new month on The Compliance Life! In July I visit with Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent. In Episode 1, from Claire Huxable to the DOJ. In Episode 2, ‘What do you think about Abu Dhabi?' The tables are turned on Tom by the Brothers Gallo and Jason Mefford as they interview him for their respective pods. Nick and Gio on The Ethics Experts. Jason on Jamming with Jason. The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition is released. Learn about it here. Purchase it here. Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, AMI’s Dionne Lomax speaks with Joe Miller. Joe is the co-chair of Mintz Levin’s antitrust practice, and is also a partner in the firm’s healthcare practice group. At Mintz, Joe advises health systems, physician groups, health plans, trade associations, and other healthcare related businesses on assessing and mitigating antitrust risk, as well as representation before antitrust enforcers. In this discussion, they focus on recent developments in antitrust compliance — specifically, compliance with government consent decrees and what might be occurring behind the scenes at federal enforcement agencies once a company has settled antitrust charges.

Todd B. Buck, Ph.D. Of Counsel Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. What are some hot areas in the biotech industry? (e.g., gene editing, mRNA Therapeutics, Car-T, etc.) What do you think of the patent waivers related to the vaccine? Explain what a patent is? Can information described in a patent can be used to manufacture vaccines? Can you describe generally what modified RNA is?  Whys is that patentable? Can you describe generally the differences between mRNA vaccines (Pfizer/Moderna) and AAV vaccines (AZ/J&J)?

The need for pro bono legal services for the poor has never been greater. Prior to the pandemic, legal services agencies were only able to meet a portion of the need. For example, due to lack of funding, legal aid programs in Massachusetts were forced to turn away 57 percent of residents who sought help last year. With the coming recession and millions of families in this country facing food and housing insecurity, this gap will surely widen. Pro bono lawyering will be needed to meet the great demand and fill the gap. In this episode, I am very pleased to welcome Sue Finegan who is a nationally recognized leader in pro bono representation. When I first spoke to Sue a year ago about being on the show, I thought it would be a good opportunity to talk about how pro bono can help build your legal skills and increase your career satisfaction. Today I feel it is a moral imperative to encourage practicing lawyers to do their part in proving pro bono legal services.  I invited Sue to talk about the benefits of doing pro bono work and where she thinks the needs will be in the coming year.  We also discuss how she has carved out her own unique career path and found great satisfaction in doing well by doing good. I’m thrilled to talk to someone who has dedicated her career to the cause. Sue is a Member of the law firm Mintz Levin, an AmLaw 100 firm based in Boston.  She is a nationally recognized pro bono pioneer with exceptional advocacy skills and a passion for helping underserved populations. As chair of Mintz’s Pro Bono Committee, she leads groundbreaking cases and manages pro bono matters for the firm. She helped to defeat President Trump’s first immigration travel ban in early 2017, engineer the passage of a Massachusetts restraining order law for sexual assault survivors, and create several innovative statewide model pro bono programs in Massachusetts. Sue was appointed the firm’s first Pro Bono Partner in 2007and manages the firm’s pro bono efforts, consisting of over 300 varied cases annually.  She also advises firm clients on developing and sustaining pro bono programs within their in-house legal departments. As member and current co-chair of the Massachusetts Access to Justice Commission for several years, Sue has been a tireless and innovative advocate for low income people in Massachusetts and beyond. Additional Resources MassProBono is a good starting place in Massachusetts The ABA is compiling a list of students interested in providing pro bono assistance. The registration form can be found here. This directory of non-profits seeking pro bono assistance PSJD, https://www.psjd.org (designed for students seeking public interest career opportunities, but is a great way to learn about different legal services agencies and can be searched by city, state) Pro Bono Net, https://www.probono.net/network/volunteer (offers easy ways to search by region and issue area to allow students to hone in on organizations they want to pursue, and may have specific opportunities for law students posted as well).

In part two of a three-part series, Maura Sweeney '07 interviews Joe Cavanagh '99 about how his Holy Cross experience influences the way he practices law. Recorded September 11, 2019 --- Transcript Joe:                        The idea of doing your best, your excellence for God, for others, for clients in what you do no matter what you're doing, wherever you are, personal sphere, professional sphere, other places and I take that directly from Holy Cross. Yeah. Maura:                 Welcome to Mission-Driven, where we speak with alumni who are leveraging their Holy Cross education to make a meaningful difference in the world around them. I'm your host Maura Sweeney from the class of 2007, Director of Alumni Career Development at Holy Cross. I'm delighted to welcome you to today's show.                                 In part two of the three part series, we speak with Joe Cavanagh. Joe graduated from Holy Cross in 1999 and Cornell Law School in 2003. Joe joined his father and sister at Bliss & Cavanagh and became partner in 2013. Joe speaks about the value of his time on campus and its impact on the way that he practices law. There are a few fun stories from his time on the Hill, too. Mary:                    So Joe, I'm excited to talk to you next, class of ‘99, History major. You went to Cornell Law School, graduated in 2003 are also a partner at Bliss & Cavanagh in Providence, Rhode Island. You work in general litigation with a focus on business and complex commercial employment, personal injury and real estate litigation. You also advise corporate and non-profit clients in the areas of pre-litigation strategy, employment, contracting, negotiation and compliance.                                 You also do pro bono work at the TGC Memorial Fund as well as the Board of Trustees at the Ocean Tides School. And as we've talked about, you also received Super Lawyer of the year in 2019 for Litigation within Real Estate and Best Lawyers in America in 2017. Top Litigation Attorney from Super Lawyers from 2013 to 2018, and Rising Star back in 2012 and that was a positive premonition because it proved true over the years. But I also noticed that you received a Martindale Hubbell Peer Rating for strong ethical standards, which really stood out to be, can you talk to me a little bit about that. Joe:                        Interesting that you mentioned that Maura I'm not sure I had focused on that aspect of my profile. The Martindale Hubbell Peer Rating. I've seen it before in looking up other lawyers in the directory, but didn't know that I had necessarily garnered an ethical rating there. So it was very nice to hear. Maura:                 Oh, well congratulations! Joe:                        Thank you. Maura:                 Yeah. Joe:                        So yeah, as Mary said, we have a collegial bar in Rhode Island. You have quite a bit of contact with your colleagues and other firms in the courthouse or by phone and at depositions and there's an understanding that we're part of a smaller community where people don't necessarily take cheap shots or do things with the mode or the thought that they won't see this practitioner again in their practice, which might happen in bigger cities. So in a way it replicates a smaller college community like at Holy Cross, and I think it makes for a better practice both within our firm and around the state and for the whole system, the court system, the clients that are served by it.                                 So, within that peer set, I would be thought of as having high ethical standards it's nice to hear and I would like to think that's partly due to my time at Holy Cross and the way that, my experiences I had here on campus in a similar type setting. I mean, from having been here, it is a small community, things that happen are known and word gets out quickly. Sometimes you can't believe how quickly, like Kimball before breakfast the next morning, so that element of sort of honesty and accountability within a community is one that you kind of learn and sometimes make mistakes in that regard in a small college setting like this.                                 And then to have those experiences and realize that we're all in this together and that things you say or do will have repercussions, to move that into your professional life now and I would like to think a peer voted award like that is a reflection of a recognition of that. Maura:                 That's fantastic. Right. And it's similar to what Mary and I talked about, just the incredible importance of being recognized by peers and just how significant that is. That's wonderful. Maura:                 Well, and I'd love to hear a bit more about your professional journey since you graduated from Holy Cross because I know I only captured some of the bookends. Joe:                        Sure. So after law school I went to a firm in Boston, a large firm in many cities, in international practice to Mintz Levin it was a great place to begin my career. I met many wonderful people there and there was a standard of excellence that I was exposed to and sort of reared in that I draw on every day my experiences from being in that setting. There were actually some Holy Cross alumni that were at the firm that I was thinking about driving up here today and had an event like this causes you to reflect in ways that you don't usually busy business of life.                                 But when I arrived at Mintz Levin, quickly, the Holy Cross alumni network was at work sort of informally. I think they probably had read resumes of people are arriving, new associates and went out of their way to reach out to me and Scott Ford was class of ‘89 here I think at Holy Cross. Matt Hurley was ‘88 and I'm still in touch with those lawyers, I believe they're both still partners at Mintz Levin and things like on a Friday afternoon we'd go... If Holy Cross was playing in the NCAA tournament, they ring me up, we're going out, we're going to get some lunch and we watched the game and things like that. So it was the Holy Cross community sort of taking form in the professional setting. Maura:                 Well, I mean it's what everyone says that no matter how, if you wanted to escape Holy Cross, you can't really, because you wear anything purple or people find out that you have a connection and whether they went to Holy Cross or their neighbor or their cousin or their friend, we have a way of finding each other, which I think is wonderful. In a new setting it helps you feel a lot more welcome. So on a Holy Cross note, how has Holy Cross's mission influenced your life? Joe:                        So, I had the question in mind as I was reading ahead of time here, and I was just thinking back to the spiritual exercises. I went on the spiritual exercises actually not as a Holy Cross student, it was the fall after I graduated. They made an exception, let me come back and do that. Maura:                 Oh wonderful. Joe:                        With sports on campus that it had never worked out and so I was still getting the full experience here even six, eight months after I graduated. And, again I mentioned the community element of it, but the idea that you would incorporate your spirituality and your striving for excellence for God and others into your work life was something that I every day try to incorporate into what I do.                                 I think of the Saint Ignatius prayer, I still pray it multiple times a day. And I remember getting a little green prayer card at that retreat from... I think it was from Father Ford or Father LeBran who was still conducting those at the time and reading it and then quickly committing it to memory. I don't know where the card is now I might still have it but, just trying to plug into the experience of that retreat and the idea of doing your best, your excellence for God, for others, for clients in what you do no matter what you're doing, wherever you are, personal sphere, professional sphere, other places and I've take that directly from Holy Cross. Yeah. Maura:                 Well and it sounds like you don't even need the little card anymore since you have it committed to memory. Joe:                        No. I have. Said it enough times and it sticks. Maura:                 Yeah. Yeah. Jim:                        Just like an argument in court, right? Maura:                 Well, you've touched upon this already about the Holy Cross mission and how you've internalized it. And so I'm curious to know what mission drives you and how you've really formed your own mission? Joe:                        Well, I mean, I like to think the two mold together. It's very short concise terms, to get to heaven and bring others with me or to help others get there as well, I mean at its basic element that's what I consider my life mission to be and so that in the practice of law, I mean from day to day and hour by hour, the way that that often manifests itself is to make sure in that moment whether it's a 0.1 time block, a 10th of an hour time block for a client or more than that or preparing for hearings or depositions to just make sure that I'm doing things up to a standard that that is reflective of trying to bring my best and do my best with my talents and ability because that's in that moment what's going to further that mission.                                 That's what God wants me to do for those six minutes or 12 minutes or whatever and you just... and then you're in the car headed off to youth sports events or to family events and just sort of recalibrating that mindset every minute of the day. And then obviously in the professional sphere, it means when you're advising people taking into consideration much more than just their particular narrow legal issue- Maura:                 Right. Joe:                        ... and we have in our practice in Providence, the nice flexibility in that, in addition to representing some large corporate companies and major corporations in sort of big complex litigation, we're also small enough and we're in a small enough legal market that neighbors with personal matters can call and we can actually take those matters on and help them, or people with a small business disputes that probably wouldn't even get in the door at a larger firm and it's there that you can be more of a holistic adviser and looking at helping this person along whatever path that they're taking and it may even spill over beyond the law. You're thinking about the mission to help ultimately, how can I help this person get to heaven? And so that's my mission. Maura:                 It's an important one. Yeah. Maura:                 Well, and I'll ask you to think back to when you were a student at Holy Cross and what stands out most from your experience and how it's really prepared you for these moments of helping people with their challenges and maybe helping with some of your own challenges. Joe:                        I'd say first and foremost like Mary said, because we were both History majors at about the same time. So I think our experiences were probably very similar. The workload... I think we did a five course load at Holy Cross when we were here in the mid ‘90s and that seemed to be talking to friends at other schools, one more core substantive academic course than others would take. So there was always a lot of work and in the history department there was always a lot of reading and writing all the time and deadlines, constantly deadlines. Write papers tomorrow, 10 page paper due Friday, 12 pages due Tuesday, I mean really our litigation practice at Providence is not much different at all, so you kind of hone those skills. But also the sort of the demands of some of the professors.                                 I remember Father Kuzniewski, taking his History classes and we had a trip that we were taking out to Colorado Springs, the hockey team was to play Air Force Academy, that was in October of my senior year and we were going to fly out of Logan on a Thursday morning for the weekend games and I think we were leaving the Hart Center at 5:00 AM and we had a History test scheduled for that day so I went to see Father K a week or so before and I said, here's my conflict so I can’t take the test. Well let me know if I can take it when I get back or make another arrangement, and he said, "Well, what time does the bus leave the Hart Center?" I said, "5:00 AM we're going to be packed up and go." He said, "Okay, well this will work well."                                 He said, Ciampi’s is on the way to the Hart Center so why don't you stop by. Ring the bell at Ciampi at 3:00 AM and you can take your test from 3:00 AM to 4:30 AM that will give plenty of time to get up there and get on the bus." And that's what I did. I showed up at the Ciampi Hall at 3:00 AM and Father K set me up with a little space, I think he offered me some coffee and- Maura:                 It's the least he could do. Joe:                        ... I took my History test. In just the little mini capsule that was Holy Cross and then I was on the bus and we were off and we had a great weekend and work due on Monday morning when we flew back. Maura:                 And then when others were complaining about that 5:00 AM meeting, you said, "I've been up for hours, so I don't want to hear it." Joe:                        That's right. Joe:                        I wasn't worried about missing the bus. Maura:                 That is the priceless story. That is absolutely priceless. And do you remember, did you do okay at 3:00 AM? Joe:                        I did. I remember I got an A on the test. Maura:                 Well, see that's even more impressive, right? Joe:                        Yeah. Maura:                 Right. Joe:                        Yeah. I didn't get A's on every test but I did get an A on that one. I remember too Coach Pearl, who was the hockey coach at the time, he had a freshman study hall that he had posted on the board up there for the players to go to and I for some reason thought or assumed it was optional, like he would make the time available if you felt you were needing extra study time and otherwise, I was thinking, you just go to the library or maybe you didn't have anything to do that day and so you wouldn't go. So I saw there was a note on the board the day after I had blown off or missed the study hall, wasn't a blow up to me. It said, "Cavanagh, see me." And I did and he said, "What was the story last night? Where were you?" I said, "Well, I thought it was optional coach." He said, "Optional? No, no, no, that wasn't optional."                                 So he said, "Why don't you come meet me up here tomorrow morning at 7:00." And I said, "Okay, I'll be here." And he said, "And wear your workout clothes too." And so I came up to the front of Hart Center I remember this, I think it was a Friday morning and he was there and in a lawn chair outside with the paper in his hand and a stopwatch.                                 And he said, "Okay, Cav, down to the front steps of Kimball and back in less than five minutes or you do it again, go." And I shot down the hill and you wouldn't believe how quickly you can get from the front steps of Hart Center to Kimball when you're going on adrenaline and moving. But the minute you turn around and start going back the other direction, I was like, "Yeah, I'm still sore. I think I blocked it out, the whole experience." But it was demands like that are rearing you and preparing you for bigger things and similar obligations later in life so I had a great experience here playing hockey for Coach Pearl and definitely in reflection appreciate things like that from the community from the kind of the leaders or the instructors here. Maura:                 Yeah, they make sure you don't forget. Maura:                 How has your Holy Cross education influenced the way that you practice law? Joe:                        Well, it's like I was saying earlier, drawing on your academic experiences, your ability to manage time, you're looking at the faith mission of the college and the and the faith foundation that it provides, and then trying to incorporate that into your conversations and your thinking with your clients every day. Maura:                 Yeah. Yeah. And what has been the most satisfying or rewarding moment in your work? Joe:                        Well, I mean winning an appeal before the Rhode Island Supreme Court, winning summary judgment on big cases for some clients, those things jump out as kind of the most beneficial legal results. Winning a trial and having it affirmed on appeal in cases. But I think actually the matters that I've seen that have taken twists and turns and sort of winding roads through our superior court with multiple parties over years sometimes and then getting to the end of that road and having a satisfied client that knows that you stuck by them through the whole process and through ups and downs.                                 I've had a couple of those recently and it becomes at times... I don't want to say a war of attrition, but that's it. I mean someone comes into your office and they have something there may be emotionally really stirred up about something that just happened and they want to be in the court the next day and sue everybody and then one of the first conversations you have to have is like, "Listen, this doesn't happen. This is emotion sort of the raw feeling that you're going on right now, by the time we're moving forward in this case it'll probably subside quite a bit and it's going to be down to your legal rights and making sure that you want to keep pursuing those and protect your interests."                                 And then over time, for the clients to see that you are committed to that what I'd call sort of a higher pursuit and them sticking by you and you sticking by them to get to the end of that road where the emotion and the initial sting is sort of well past, those are the most satisfying moments for me. Maura:                 That's fantastic. Yeah. And I'm sure it's not easy too. I'm sure there are a lot of challenges along the way too and so not easy to stick by. So that's great. Maura:                 And then my last question for you is what advice would you have for someone who's interested in practicing law? Joe:                        Well, let's see, I would... like Mary had said, if someone's interested in going to law school, you'd really want to check the motivation and make sure that it's not just a logical next step that they hadn't thought too much about. But I would say that they'd want to go ahead and pursue it, but then keep an eye on how the technology of today is kind of changing the practice of law. I mean, so much is done just at your desk, at your computer on email or phone and see for us we can still comment that that's different and that's not how we began our practices and we can kind of feel the toll of that when you don't have as many face to face interactions with people and you think, "Boy, it's been a while since I've seen this person and why is that because I used to see them all the time."                                 And it's just the change in nature of things so I would think it'd be difficult if you've never practiced law at all where that wasn't the case, where hearings and conferences are routinely done now just by phone and video link and so I think I would tell them to spend time beginning in law school making sure that they spend time with their classmates and have real human interaction there and that they try to do the same with their clients. Maura:                 Well, and I think that speaks so much to what you both talked about of really finding the human element in your clients and really treating them like the person who they are and how that can get so easily lost with technology, and when things are virtual it's easier to create that distance and it sounds how important it is to really force yourself to make the time for real interactions. Joe:                        Absolutely. Yeah. Maura:                 Right. Right. Joe:                        And with other lawyers too and with judges and clerks and all the people that you come in contact with in a legal practice. Maura:                 Right, right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Joe:                        Thank you. Maura:                 That's our show. I hope you enjoyed hearing about just one of the many ways that Holy Cross alumni have been inspired by the mission to be men and women for and with others. A special thanks to today's guests and everyone at Holy Cross who has contributed to making this podcast a reality. If you or someone you know would like to be featured on this podcast, please send us an email at alumnicareers@holycross.edu. If you like what you hear, then please leave us a review. This podcast is brought to you by the Office of Alumni Relations at the College of the Holy Cross. You can subscribe for future episodes wherever you find your podcasts. I'm your host, Maura Sweeney, and this is Mission-Driven. In the words of Saint Ignatius of Loyola, "now go forth and set the world on fire." --- Theme music composed by Scott Holmes, courtesy of freemusicarchive.org.

In this episode, I welcome former U.S. Senator William “Mo” Cowan.  Mo currently serves as President, Global Government Affairs and Policy for General Electric.  Mo talks about his journey from the practice of law to public service and into government affairs. Law School as a Path to Public Service and Government Relations Law school has always been a good path to public service.  Legal training provides an important framework for understanding legislation, regulation and how the judiciary functions and attorneys have a lot of credibility in pursuing these roles. Elected office is a common avenue for lawyers who want to get more involved in Federal, state or local government.  But many lawyers find themselves supporting elected officials in one way or another by serving on their staff. Some stay in private practice and volunteer to serve on local or State boards or commissions. Government relations is another avenue that is open to attorneys who want to be involved in public policy from the industry side. Mo Cowan is someone who has worked as a litigator in private practice, served as a key aide to a Governor, worked for one of the leading government relations firms in Massachusetts, managed litigation and investigations for a major corporation and now manages government relations for the same company. At GE today, Mo is responsible for directing the company’s government relations and public policy engagement in the United States and around the world.  Mo also leads the Global Growth Organizational national executive teams in Europe and Canada. He previously served as Vice President, Litigation and Legal Policy for the Company, overseeing litigation, enforcement proceedings, investigations and compliance globally. Before joining GE, Mo held leadership roles with ML Strategies, a leading government relations and consulting firm, and the law firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo. On January 30, 2013, Governor Deval L. Patrick appointed Mo to serve as interim United States Senator upon the resignation of John F. Kerry and concluded his Senate service on July 16, 2013. Prior to his Senate appointment, Mo served Governor Patrick in a variety of leadership positions, including Chief Legal Counsel, Chief of Staff, and Senior Advisor. As Chief of Staff, Mo directed strategic planning, investment and operations, including oversight of the state’s multi-billion dollar, annual budgeting process. As chief strategist and crisis manager to the Governor, Mo advised on all domestic and international affairs, intergovernmental relations and gubernatorial appointments and administered all management and personnel functions within the Governor’s office. Before joining Governor Patrick, Mo served as Chair of the Anti-Money Laundering Compliance and Counseling Group at the law firm Mintz Levin. Mo is a graduate of Duke University and Northeastern University School of Law

This week on DisrupTV, we interviewed Keerthika Subramanian, Senior Capital Markets Associate at Mintz Levin, Kristen Laughlin, Founder and CEO at Avion Consulting Group, Nadja El Fertasi CEO/Founder of Nadja El Fertasi, EQ (Emotional Intelligence) Coaching & Consulting, Brussels, Belgium, and Dr. David A. Bray, Executive Director, People-Centered Internet coalition and Faculty, Impact & Disruption at Singularity University. DisrupTV is a weekly Web series with hosts R “Ray” Wang and Vala Afshar. The show airs live at 11:00 a.m. PT/ 2:00 p.m. ET every Friday. Brought to you by Constellation Executive Network: constellationr.com/CEN.

Welcome again to Necessary & Proper. Today we bring you the great discussion we had from the afternoon panel of the 2019 Legislative Branch Review Conference, held on the Hill in February in partnership with the Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter. The panel speculated on what a world without Chevron deference doctrine could look like, and if it would be desirable. We hope you find this podcast interesting and enjoyable. Featuring:Mr. Mark Chenoweth, Executive Director and General Counsel, New Civil Liberties AllianceMr. David D. Doniger, Director, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense CouncilProf. Kristin Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law SchoolProf. David S. Schoenbrod, Trustee Professor of Law, New York Law SchoolModerator: Prof. Jennifer L. Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law SchoolIntroduction: Joel Nolette, Litigation Associate, Mintz Levin

Welcome again to Necessary & Proper. Today we bring you the great discussion we had from the afternoon panel of the 2019 Legislative Branch Review Conference, held on the Hill in February in partnership with the Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter. The panel speculated on what a world without Chevron deference doctrine could look like, and if it would be desirable. We hope you find this podcast interesting and enjoyable. Featuring:Mr. Mark Chenoweth, Executive Director and General Counsel, New Civil Liberties AllianceMr. David D. Doniger, Director, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense CouncilProf. Kristin Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law SchoolProf. David S. Schoenbrod, Trustee Professor of Law, New York Law SchoolModerator: Prof. Jennifer L. Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law SchoolIntroduction: Joel Nolette, Litigation Associate, Mintz Levin

Cameron Kerry joined Governance Studies and the Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings as the first Ann R. and Andrew H. Tisch Distinguished Visiting Fellow in December 2013. In addition to his Brookings affiliation, Cameron Kerry is Senior Counsel at Sidley Austin, LLP in Boston and Washington, DC, and a Visiting Scholar the MIT Media Lab. His practice at Sidley Austin involves privacy, security, and international trade issues. Kerry served as General Counsel and Acting Secretary of the United States Department of Commerce, where he was a leader on a wide of range of issues laying a new foundation for U.S. economic growth in a global marketplace. He continues to speak and write on these issues, particularly privacy and data security, intellectual property, and international trade.While Acting Secretary, Cameron Kerry served as chief executive of this Cabinet agency and its 43,000 employees around the world, as well as an adviser to the President.  His tenure marked the first time in U.S. history two siblings have served in the President's Cabinet at the same time.As General Counsel, he was the principal legal adviser to the several Secretaries of Commerce and Commerce agency heads, and oversaw the work of more than 400 lawyers across these agencies.  He was a leader in the Obama Administration's successful effort to pass the America Invents Act, the most significant overhaul of the patent system in more 150 years.  As co-chair of the National Science Technology Council Subcommittee on Privacy and Internet Policy, he spearheaded development of the White House blueprint on consumer privacy, Consumer Data Privacy in a Networked World.   He then led the Administration's implementation of the blueprint, drafting privacy legislation and engaging on privacy issues with international partners, including the European Union.  He helped establish and lead the Commerce Department's Internet Policy Task Force, which brings together agencies with expertise in the 21st Century digital economy.He also played a significant role on intellectual property policy and litigation, cybersecurity, international bribery, trade relations and rule of law development in China, the Gulf Oil spill litigation, and many other challenges facing a large, diverse federal agency.  He travelled to the People's Republic of China on numerous occasions to co-lead the Transparency Dialogue with China as well as the U.S./ China Legal Exchange and exchanges on anti-corruption.Before his appointment to the Obama Administration in 2009, Cameron Kerry practiced law at the Mintz Levin firm in Boston and Washington.  His practice covered a range of complex commercial litigation and regulation of telecommunications.  He tried cases involving significant environmental and scientific evidence issues and taught telecommunications law as an adjunct professor at Suffolk University Law School.Prior to joining Mintz Levin, he was an associate at Wilmer Cutler Pickering in Washington, D.C. and a law clerk to Senior Circuit Judge Elbert P. Tuttle of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.  During the 2004 presidential campaign, Cameron Kerry was a close adviser and national surrogate for Democratic nominee John Kerry. He has been deeply involved in electoral politics throughout his adult life. He is a magna cum laude graduate of Boston College Law School (1978), where he was winner of the school's moot court competition and a law review editor. and a cum laude graduate of Harvard College (1972).Cameron Kerry also has been actively engaged in politics and community service throughout his adult life.  In 2004-04, he was a senior adviser and national surrogate in the U.S. Presidential campaign, traveling to 29 States and Israel.  He has served on the boards of non-profits involved in civic engagement and sports.

Kate Ziegler is the Operations Supervisor at Mintz Levin, and is also a Boston-based Realtor, investor, entrepreneur, and speaker on The Hustle. Born and raised on a farm in rural Pennsylvania, she has made Boston home since attending Northeastern University to study International Affairs and Art. The daughter of a contractor, Kate has worked in … Continued

Alden Bianchi of Mintz Levin and Christopher Condeluci of CC Law & Policy join Talking Tax host Andrea L. Ben-Yosef to discuss the new rules for association health plans, which change the standards for determining which small employers are permitted to join with other small employers to form, maintain, and participate in single, large group health plans. These health care law experts discuss how association health plans work, who should consider using them, and how they will impact the health care marketplace.

In this episode of energywakeup I talk about the current Tax Reform Bill with Audrey Louison from Mintz and Greg Jenner from Stoel Rives. The tax reform bill was in conference committee at the time of this recording and had several issues that impacted the solar industry. The corporate AMT, a lower corporate tax rate and the BEAT provision. I walk through each of the items with Audrey and Greg, get an explanation (because nobody understood the BEAT provision) and how it impacts solar project financing going forward. Greg has been around tax law for many years, including as a tax counsel for the senate finance committee when the last major tax reform passed in 1986 and Audrey has completed over 500 project transaction. This bill will have major impacts to the way you present projects to your clients and investors and this episode helps guide you through that process with a bit more knowledge. This podcast was recorded in front of a live audience at SolarWakeup Live DC. Make sure to catch previous episode on your favorite podcast platform, episodes with the director of renewable energy at Massachussets DOER, the CEO of Sunpower, Former FERC Chairman and CEO of the Rocky Mountain Institute. Join us on January 31st in New York and look out for future events across the Country. Make sure to catch previous episodes on your favorite podcast platform.

This week on the I Love Data Centers podcast: Data Center Industry Attorney Perspectives, I interview Jeffery A. Moerdler. My favorite interviews are ones where I get to scratch my itch for more industry knowledge and this was most definitely the case with this interview. Jeffrey A. Moerdler, Real Estate Partner at Mintz Levin and former Commissioner at Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, has spent decades working and drafting data center and telecommunications related contracts representing both the buyer and seller. He is also the founder of the IMN Forum on Data Centers and Cloud Services, which just recently had their 8th annual fall event in Chicago. Our conversation covers the legal and business implications of a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT), the ins and outs of data center service and lease contracts, data privacy laws, cyber security and a variety of related topics. There is a mountain of valuable information and insight within this episode! Enjoy! Episode 17 Show Notes 1:11 Interview starts  2:01 Where are you located right now?  3:48 Growing up in New York, how did you become familiar with technology?   8:08 How did you become educated about data centers?   10:01 How and why Jeffrey started the IMN Data Center Forum  14:48 How have the topics during the related data center conferences evolved over the years?  23:41 Data Center server “huggers”  26:40 What has kept Jeffrey from directly working for a brokerage firm  31:09 The most common mistakes Jeffery has seen people make in the data center industry  36:19 Important concepts people in the industry need to grasp   41:30 Conversation re: liability for building owners   44:01 Why data center owners and operators prefer the REIT structure  45:20 Why does a REIT provide access to a lower cost of capital?  46:42 The cons of the REIT structure  52:18 Data privacy laws  57:33 InfraGard  1:07:20 Legality of data shared between countries  1:13:23 Why AWS and Azure will not eliminate the need for data centers  1:19:45 Jeffrey’s first time in a data center  1:25:09 What is the most fascinating thing you’ve learned in your profession in the past 3 days?   1:30:19 What is some advice you would give to someone new to the industry?   1:35:00 How to get in touch with Jeffrey   Links mentioned in this episode InfraGard: https://www.infragard.org/ Jeffery on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreymoerdler/

Join David Ackert as he interviews Amy Fowler, Chief Marketing & Business Development Officer at Mintz Levin. In this episode of the Market Leaders Podcast, David and Amy discuss: - Mintz's state-of-the-art lateral integration program that onboards new hires with a success rate of over 75% - Amy's approaches to mentoring her team to effectively utilize their personal strengths - Her unique engagement of Business Development Managers as coaches and mentors to lateral hires - Her team's use of external research data that focuses their business development efforts

An attorney who is approachable and will take your call – gratis – on a Saturday morning? #who’dathunkit Jeremy D. Glaser is a member of the law firm of Mintz, Levin, where he serves as Co-chair of the firm’s Venture Capital & Emerging Companies Practice. For more than 30 years Jeremy has helped companies raise angel and venture … Continue reading "Ep24: Jeremy Glaser (Mintz Levin) Experience Matters in Startups: Entrepreneur—>Attorney—>Tech Exec—>Attorney"

(Bloomberg) -- Patricia Moran, of counsel at Mintz Levin, discusses the potential elimination of a governmental rule that mandated most employers to provide free birth control to women using their insurance plans. She speaks with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law." Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

(Bloomberg) -- Patricia Moran, of counsel at Mintz Levin, discusses the potential elimination of a governmental rule that mandated most employers to provide free birth control to women using their insurance plans. She speaks with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law."

Sue Foster is a London-based partner at Mintz Levin. In the second part of the interview, she discusses the interesting loophole for ransomware breach reporting requirements that's currently in the GDPR However, there's another EU regulation going into effect in May of 2018, the NIS Directive, which would make ransomware reportable. And Foster talks about the interesting implications of IOT devices in terms of the GDPR. Is the data collected by your internet-connected refrigerator or coffee pot considered personal data under the GDPR? Foster says it is! Inside Out Security Sue Foster is a partner with Mintz Levin based out of the London office. She works with clients on European data protection compliance and on commercial matters in the fields of clean tech, high tech, mobile media, and life sciences. She's a graduate of Stanford Law School. SF is also, and we like this here at Varonis, a Certified Information Privacy Professional. I'm very excited to be talking to an attorney with a CIPP, and with direct experience on a compliance topic we cover on our blog — the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR. Welcome, Susan. Sue Foster Hi Andy. Thank you very much for inviting me to join you today. There's a lot going on in Europe around cybersecurity and data protection these days, so it's a fantastic set of topics. IOS Oh terrific. So what are some of the concerns you're hearing from your clients on GDPR? SF So one of the big concerns is getting to grips with the extra-territorial reach. I work with a number of companies that don't have any office or other kind of presence in Europe that would qualify them as being established in Europe. But they are offering goods or services to people in Europe. And for these companies, you know in the past they've had to go through quite a bit of analysis to understand the Data Protection Directive applies to them. Under the GDPR, it's a lot clearer and there are rules that are easier for people to understand and follow. So now when I speak to my U.S. clients, if they're a non-resident company that promotes goods or services in the EU, including free services like a free app, for example, they'll be subject to the GDPR. That's very clear. Also, if a non-resident company is monitoring the behavior of people who are located in the EU, including tracking and profiling people based on their internet or device usage, or making automated decisions about people based on their personal data, the company is subject to the GDPR. It's also really important for U.S. companies to understand that there's a new ePrivacy Regulation in draft form that would cover any provider, regardless of location, of any form of publicly available electronic communication services to EU users. Under this ePrivacy Regulation, the notion of what these communication services providers are is expanded from the current rules, and it includes things that are called over-the-top applications – so messaging apps and communications features, even when a communication feature is just something that is embedded in a website. If it's available to the public and enables communication, even in a very limited sort of forum, it's going to be covered. That's another area where U.S. companies are getting to grips with the fact that European rules will apply to them. So this new security regulation as well that may apply to companies located outside the EU. So all of these things are combining to suddenly force a lot of U.S. companies to get to grips with European law. IOS So just to clarify, let's say a small U.S. social media company that doesn't market specifically to EU countries, doesn't have a website in the language of some of the EU country, they would or would not fall under the GDPR? SF On the basis of their [overall] marketing activity they wouldn't. But we would need to understand if they're profiling or they're tracking EU users or through viral marketing that's been going on, right? And they are just tracking everybody. And they know that they're tracking people in the EU. Then they're going to be caught. But if they're not doing that, if not engaging in any kind of tracking, profiling, or monitoring activities, and they're not affirmatively marketing into the EU, then they're outside of the scope. Unless of course, they're offering some kind of service that falls under one of these other regulations that we were talking about. IOS What we're hearing from our customers is that the 72-hour breach rule for reporting is a concern. And our customers are confused and after looking at some of the fine print, we are as well!! So I'm wondering if you could explain the breach reporting in terms of thresholds, what needs to happen before a report is made to the DBA's and consumers? SF Sure absolutely. So first it's important to look at the specific definition of personal data breach. It means a breached security leading to the ‘accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of or access to personal data’.  So it's fairly broad. The requirement to report these incidents has a number of caveats. So you have to report the breach to the Data Protection Authority as soon as possible, and where feasible, no later than 72 hours after becoming aware of the breach. Then there's a set of exceptions. And that is unless the personal data breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. So I can understand why U.S. companies would sort of look at this and say, ‘I don't really know what that means’. How do I know if a breach is likely to ‘result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons’? Because that's not defined anywhere in this regulation! It's important to understand that that little bit of text is EU-speak that really refers to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is part of EU law. There is actually a document you can look at to tell you what these rights and freedoms are. But you can think of it basically in common sense terms. Are the person's privacy rights affected, are their rights and the integrity of their communications affected, or is their property affected? So you could, for example, say that there's a breach that isn't likely to reveal information that I would consider personally compromising in a privacy perspective, but it could lead to fraud, right? So that could affect my property rights. So that would be one of those issues. Basically, most of the time you're going to have to report the breach. When you're going through the process of working out whether you need to report the breach to the DPA, and you're considering whether or not the breach is likely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, one of the things that you can look at is whether people are practically protected. Or whether there's a minimal risk because of steps you've already taken such as encrypting data or pseudonymizing data and you know that the key that would allow re-identification of the subjects hasn't been compromised. So these are some of the things that you can think about when determining whether or not you need to report to the Data Protection Authority. If you decide you have to report, you then need to think about ‘do you need to report the breach to the data subjects’, right? And the standard there is that is has to be a “high risk to the rights and freedoms” of natural persons’. So a high risk to someone's privacy rights or rights on their property and things of that sort. And again, you can look at the steps that you've taken to either prevent the data from — you know before it even was leaked — prevent it from being potentially vulnerable in a format where people could be damaged. Or you could think also whether you've taken steps after the breach that would prevent those kinds of risks from happening. Now, of course, the problem is the risk of getting it wrong, right? If you decide that you're not going to report after you go through this full analysis and the DPA disagrees with you, now you're running the risk of a fine to 2% of the group’s global turnover …or gross revenue around the world. And that I think it’s going to lead to a lot of companies being cautious in reporting when even they might have been able to take advantage of some of these exceptions but they won't feel comfortable with that. IOS I see. So just to bring it to more practical terms. We can assume that let's say credit card numbers or some other identification number, if that was breach or taken, would have to be reported both to the DPA and the consumer? SF Most likely. I mean if it's...yeah almost certainly. Particularly if the security code on the back of the card has been compromised, and absolutely you've got a pretty urgent situation. You also have a responsibility to basically provide a risk assessment to the individuals, and advise them on steps that they can take to protect themselves such as canceling their card immediately. IOS One hypothetical that I wanted to ask you about is the Yahoo breach, which technically happened a few years ago. I think it was over two years ago … Let's say something like that had happened after the GDPR where a company sort of had known that there was something happening that looked like a breach, but they didn't know the extent of it. If they had not reported it, and waited until after the 72-hour rule, what would have happened to let's say a multinational like Yahoo? SF Well, Yahoo would need to go through the same analysis, and it's hard to imagine that a breach on that scale and with the level of access that was provided to the Yahoo users accounts as a result of those breaches, and of course the fact that people know that it's very common for individuals to reuse passwords across different sites, and so you, you know, have the risks sort of follow on problems. It's hard to imagine they would be in a situation where they would be off the hook for reporting. Now the 72-hour rule is not hard and fast. But the idea is you report as soon as possible. So you can delay for a little while if it's necessary for say a law enforcement investigation, right? That's one possibility. Or if you're doing your own internal investigation and somehow that would be compromised or taking security measures would be compromised in some way by reporting it to the DPA. But that'll be pretty rare. Obviously going along for months and months with not reporting it would be beyond the pale. And I would say a company like Yahoo would potentially be facing a fine of 2% of its worldwide revenue! IOS So this is really serious business, especially for multinationals. This is also a breach reporting related question, and it has to do with ransomware. We're seeing a lot of ransomware attacks these days. In fact, when we visit customer sites and analyze their systems, we sometimes see these attacks happening in real time. Since a ransomware attack encrypts the file data but most of the time doesn't actually take the data or the personal data, would that breach have to be reported or not? SF This is a really interesting question! I think the by-the-book answer is, technically, if a ransomware attack doesn't lead to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, or alteration or unauthorized disclosure of or access to the personal data, it doesn't actually fall under the GDPR's definition of a personal data breach, right? So, if a company is subject to an attack that prevents it from accessing its data, but the intruder can not itself access, change or destroy the data, you could argue it's not a personal data breach, therefore not reportable. But it sure feels like one, doesn't it? IOS Yes, it does! SF Yeah. I suspect we're going to find that the new European Data Protection Board will issue guidance that somehow brings ransomware attacks into the fold of what's reportable. Don't know that for sure, but it seems likely to me that they'll find a way to do that. Now, there are two important caveats. Even though, technically, a ransomware attack may not be reportable, companies should remember that a ransomware attack could cause them to be in breach of other requirements of the GDPR, like the obligation to ensure data integrity and accessibility of the data. Because by definition, you know, the ransomware attack has made the data non-assessable and has totally corrupted its integrity. So, there could be a liability there under the GDPR. And also, the company that's suffering the ransomware attack should consider whether they're subject to the new Network and Information Security Directive, which is going to be implemented in national laws by May 9th of 2018. So again, May 2018 being a real critical time period. That directive requires service providers to notify the relevant authority when there's been a breach that has a substantial impact on the services, even if there was no GDPR personal data breach. And the Network and Information Security Directive applies to a wide range of companies, including those that provide "essential services”. Sort of the fundamentals that drive the modern economy: energy, transportation, financial services. But also, it applies to digital service providers, and that would include cloud computing service providers. You know, there could be quite a few companies that are being held up by ransomware attacks who are in the cloud space, and they'll need to think about their obligations to report even if there's maybe not a GDPR reporting requirement. IOS Right, interesting. Okay. As a security company, we've been preaching Privacy by Design principles, data minimization and retention limits, and in the GPDR it's now actually part of the law. The GDPR is not very specific about what has to be done to meet these Privacy by Design ideas, so do you have an idea what the regulators might say about PbD as they issue more detailed guidelines? SF They'll probably tell us more about the process but not give us a lot of insight as to specific requirements, and that's partly because the GDPR itself is very much a show-your-work regulation. You might remember back on old,old math tests, right? When you were told, ‘Look, you might not get the right answer, but show all of your work in that calculus problem and you might get some partial credit.’ And it's a little bit like that. The GDPR is a lot about process! So, the push for Privacy by Design is not to say that there are specific requirements other than paying attention to whatever the state of the art is at the time. So, really looking at the available privacy solutions at the time and thinking about what you can do. But a lot of it is about just making sure you've got internal processes for analyzing privacy risks and thinking about privacy solutions. And for that reason, I think we're just going to get guidance that stresses that, develops that idea. But any guidance that told people specifically what security technologies they needed to apply would probably be good for, you know, 12 or 18 months, and then something new would come along. Where we might see some help is, eventually, in terms of ISO standards. Maybe there'll be an opportunity in the future for something that comes along that's an international standard, that talks about the process that companies go through to design privacy into services and devices, etc. Maybe then we'll have a little more certainty about it. But for now, and I think for the foreseeable future, it's going to be about showing your work, making sure you've engaged, and that you've documented your engagement, so that if something does go wrong, at least you can show what you did. IOS That's very interesting, and a good thing to know. One last question, we've been following some of the security problems related to Internet of Things devices, which are gadgets on the consumer market that can include internet-connected coffee pots, cameras, children toys. We've learned from talking to testing experts that vendors are not really interested in PBD. It's ship first, maybe fix security bugs later. Any thoughts on how the GDPR will effect IOT vendors? SF It will definitely have an impact. The definition of personal data under the GDPR is very, very broad. So, effectively, anything that I am saying that a device picks up is my personal data, as well as data kind of about me, right? So, if you think about a device that knows my shopping habits that I can speak to and I can order things, everything that the device hears is effectively my personal data under the European rules. And Internet of Things vendors do seem to be lagging behind in Privacy by Design. I suspect we're going to see investigations and fines in this area early on, when the GDPR starts being enforced on May, 2018. Because the stories about the security risks of, say, children's toys have really caught the attention of the media and the public, and the regulators won't be far behind. And now, we have fines for breaches that range from 2% to 4% of a group's global turnover. It's an area that is ripe for enforcement activity, and I think it may be a surprise to quite a few companies in this space. It's also really important to go back to this important theme that there are other regulations, besides the GDPR itself, to keep track of in Europe. The new ePrivacy Regulation contains some provisions targeted at the internet of things, such as the requirement to get consent from consumers from machine-to-machine transfers of communications data, which is going to be very cumbersome. The [ePrivacy] Regulation says you have to do it, it doesn't really say how you're going to get consent, meaningful consent, that’s a very high standard in Europe, to these transfers when there's no real intelligent interface between the device and the person, the consumer who's using it. Because there are some things that have, maybe kind of a web dashboard. There's some kind of app that you use and you communicate with your device, you could have privacy settings. There's other stuff that's much more behind the scenes with Internet of Things, where the user is not having a high level of engagement. So, maybe a smart refrigerator that's reeling information about energy consumption to, you know, the grid. Even there, you know, there's potentially information where the user is going to have to give consent to the transfer. And it's hard to kind of imagine exactly what that interface is going to look like! I'll mention one thing about the ePrivacy Regulation. It's in draft form. It could change, and that's important to know. It's not likely to change all that much, and it's on a fast-track timeline because the commission would like to have it in place and ready to go May, 2018, the same time as the GDPR. IOS  Sue Foster, I'd like to thank you again for your time. SF You're very welcome. Thank you very much for inviting me to join you today.

Sue Foster is a London-based partner at Mintz Levin. She has a gift for explaining the subtleties in the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In this first part of the interview, she discusses how US companies can get caught up in either the GDPR's extraterritoriality rule or the e-Privacy Directive's new language on embedded communication. She also decodes the new breach notification rules, and when you need to report to the DPA and consumers. Privacy and IT security pros should find her discussion particularly relevant.

In this episode, Jordan Cohen, Associate at Mintz Levin and Carolyn Hoitela, Director of Practice Management at Conventus outline practical steps and considerations for hospitals and physicians as they consider how to implement MACRA. Learn how to listen to The Hospital Finance Podcast on your mobile device. You may also like The future of MACRA in 2017 [PODCAST] Michael Read More

Alden Bianchi, a member at Mintz Levin, and Abbe Gluck, Faculty Director of the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale University, discuss republican plans for an Obamacare repeal. They speak with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law." Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Alden Bianchi, a member at Mintz Levin, and Abbe Gluck, Faculty Director of the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale University, discuss republican plans for an Obamacare repeal. They speak with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law."

(Bloomberg) -- Alden Bianchi, a member at Mintz Levin, and Abbe Gluck, Faculty Director of the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale University, discuss republican plans for an Obamacare repeal. They speak with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law." Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

(Bloomberg) -- Alden Bianchi, a member at Mintz Levin, and Abbe Gluck, Faculty Director of the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale University, discuss republican plans for an Obamacare repeal. They speak with June Grasso and Michael Best on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law."

The topic for April is Sexual and Domestic Assault. State Representative Michael Day leads a discussion with Linda Leis of the Stoneham Alliance Against Violence about her work with the group. He is then joined by Julie Dahlstrom, Clinical Legal Fellow at the Human Trafficking Clinic and Alec Zadek, Lawyer at Mintz Levin and victims advocate

A lawyer, Amy Schumer and an @icecoldpenguin walk into a bar… Sounds like the setup to a hilarious punchline, right? Well, find out what happens when you listen this week! We roll up our sleeves and get into the great Amy Schumer / GQ / Star Wars debate. For such a topic with so many points of view, we couldn't do it alone! Our friend Teresa Delgado of Fangirls Going Rogue joined us to tell us her story of her tweet seen ‘round the world and STN consultant Dave Skale helps us see both sides of the issue. (19:22) But with so many legal questions swirling around the fandomverse , we took the conversation one step further and called copyright attorney, Andrew Skale from Mintz Levin to help us figure out what defense GQ and Amy Schumer would have if Disney unleashed their legion of lawyers! (1:05:31) How does ANT-MAN stack up to the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe? We review the film spoiler-free with Kevin RaiderNerd, owner of Spartan Phoenix Movie Blog where you can find reviews on a wide variety of films. (1:24:34) Also on this week's episode: Disneyland's 60th Anniversary review with Russ Flores - July 17, 2015 (6:36) Skywalker Of The Week  (6:36) Skywalker Shout-Outs (6:36) And remember…NeverLand On Alderaan! HELP SUPPORT THE SHOW Skywalking Through Neverland T-Shirts at TeePublic! Check them out HERE. Shopping HerUniverse? Click here! Need something from Amazon.com? Click here. CONTACT US tweet! tweet! @SkywalkingPod Follow us on Meerkat and join in on interactive live-streaming of events. Send emails to share@skywalkingthroughneverland.com and follow us on Facebook. If you dug this episode, click over to iTunes | Stitcher | YouTube and leave us a review!

A lawyer, Amy Schumer and an @icecoldpenguin walk into a bar… Sounds like the setup to a hilarious punchline, right? Well, find out what happens when you listen this week! We roll up our sleeves and get into the great Amy Schumer / GQ / Star Wars debate. For such a topic with so many points of view, we couldn't do it alone! Our friend Teresa Delgado of Fangirls Going Rogue joined us to tell us her story of her tweet seen ‘round the world and STN consultant Dave Skale helps us see both sides of the issue. (19:22) But with so many legal questions swirling around the fandomverse , we took the conversation one step further and called copyright attorney, Andrew Skale from Mintz Levin to help us figure out what defense GQ and Amy Schumer would have if Disney unleashed their legion of lawyers! (1:05:31) How does ANT-MAN stack up to the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe? We review the film spoiler-free with Kevin RaiderNerd, owner of Spartan Phoenix Movie Blog where you can find reviews on a wide variety of films. (1:24:34) Also on this week’s episode: Disneyland's 60th Anniversary review with Russ Flores - July 17, 2015 (6:36) Skywalker Of The Week  (6:36) Skywalker Shout-Outs (6:36) And remember…NeverLand On Alderaan! HELP SUPPORT THE SHOW Skywalking Through Neverland T-Shirts at TeePublic! Check them out HERE. Shopping HerUniverse? Click here! Need something from Amazon.com? Click here. CONTACT US tweet! tweet! @SkywalkingPod Follow us on Meerkat and join in on interactive live-streaming of events. Send emails to share@skywalkingthroughneverland.com and follow us on Facebook. If you dug this episode, click over to iTunes | Stitcher | YouTube and leave us a review!

May 3, 2013: Law Day Career Panel: Having It All in Law: Questions and Reflections on Legal Careers 4:45-5:45 pm Room 002, Rockefeller Center Panelists: Julie Connolly '84 Julie Connolly Law, PLLC, Concord, NH Julie has extensive experience in private practice, as an assistant attorney general at the New Hampshire Department of Justice, and as a law clerk at both the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Sue Finegan '85 Pro Bono Partner, Mintz Levin, Boston, MA Susan Finegan is a Litigation Partner at Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. She currently serves as the Chair of the Pro Bono Committee and as the full-time Pro Bono Partner, overseeing 400 varied cases throughout Mintz Levin's eight offices. Her pro bono experience has primarily focused in the last fifteen years on sexual assault and domestic violence. Sarah Merlo '00 Assocaite, Vitt Brannen & Loftus, PLC, Norwich, VT Sarah Merlo is an associate with the law firm of Vitt Brannen & Loftus, PLC in Norwich, Vermont. Her current practice focuses on general civil litigation. Moderator: Alexandra Meise '01 Associate, Foley Hoag, Washington, DC Alexandra "Xander" A. Meise is an attorney and guest lecturer currently working in the international litigation and arbitration practice of Foley Hoag LLP. Her academic and professional careers have focused on the sustainable resolution of international conflicts to promote economic and political development.

Unemployment numbers are rising as companies are shedding workers at an alarming rate. In-house lawyers are front and center to make sure their companies don’t run afoul of laws that protect workers during layoffs. Join In-House Legal, host Paul D. Boynton Esq., with guest Bret A. Cohen, an employment law specialist and partner at Mintz Levin in Boston, for insight on layoffs and lawsuits - how in-house lawyers can effectively advise their companies on this pressing issue.