The Brief, July 22, 2026
NATIONAL
In Cumulus Media v. The Nielsen Co. (No. 26-88, decided July 13), the Second Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction barring Nielsen from enforcing a policy that conditioned access to its national ratings on buying local ratings in every market. For the first time in the circuit, the court recognized constructive, or de facto, tying: a seller can tie two products together not only by contract but by pricing the standalone option so high that buying the bundle becomes the only economically rational choice. Any client that sells a must-have data, analytics, or subscription product now faces antitrust exposure in how it prices the standalone option, not just in what its contracts require.
Edwards Lifesciences will pay $10 million and Genesis MedTech $2 million to resolve claims that they split a single acquisition into a $115 million asset purchase and a $25 million investment, each just under the roughly $119.5 million Hart-Scott-Rodino threshold, to sidestep premerger notification. The agencies called it the largest civil penalty they have ever obtained for a failure to file under the HSR Act, and they notably penalized the seller as well as the buyer. Structuring a deal to slide beneath the reporting line is now a documented, expensive mistake for both sides of the table.
CALIFORNIA & LA
In Mata v. Digital Recognition Network (D084781, Fourth District, Division One, filed July 20, certified for publication), the court affirmed summary judgment for the defendant. It held that a class representative who alleged only a statutory violation and a subjective sense of invaded privacy, with no resulting harm, lacked standing under the Automated License Plate Recognition statute (Civil Code section 1798.90.5 et seq.), because on its plain text the statute confers standing only on a person actually harmed by a violation. It is a published, statewide standing defense for any business facing a data-privacy class action built on a bare statutory violation.
The California Supreme Court signs off on the NextGen bar exam, starting July 2028 (2 minute read)
On July 15 the court approved the State Bar's recommendation to replace the current General Bar Exam with the National Conference of Bar Examiners' NextGen Uniform Bar Exam, beginning with the July 2028 administration. For firms that hire and train new associates, the skills the new exam tests and the transition timeline are worth putting on the calendar now.
ORANGE COUNTY
Judge James V. Selna of the Central District of California entered final judgment on July 20 preserving the November 2025 jury verdict for Irvine-based Masimo. He denied Apple's motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial, and rejected its argument that the Apple Watch is not a patient monitor under the asserted patent. Apple has signaled an appeal. It is a reminder that a well-tried infringement verdict out of the Orange County federal courthouse can survive the full post-trial gauntlet, and that the local docket carries business disputes of real consequence.
AI & PRACTICE
California moves to make AI verification a legal duty, not just best practice (3 minute read)
SB 574 (Umberg), which cleared the Senate 39 to 0 and won a committee do-pass vote in the Assembly on July 6, would bar an attorney from filing any citation that the responsible attorney has not personally read and verified, including any citation provided by generative AI, and from entering confidential or nonpublic information into a public AI system. The bill would turn today's bar guidance into enforceable duties, and the Assembly has until the end of August to act on it.
The Appellate Division, Second Department ordered attorney Michael Sanders to pay $8,000 and the Law Offices of Michael S. Lamonsoff PLLC $2,500 after a brief cited nonexistent cases, misstated the law, and misrepresented the holdings of real ones. The attorney conceded that the fabrications came from unverified AI-assisted research. Whatever SB 574's fate, the verification burden already sits with the signing lawyer, and courts are now pricing the failure.