Client Alerts & Insights
FTC Appeals Noncompete Ban Ruling
October 22, 2024
Authored By:
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has appealed a ruling from a federal court in Texas that blocked its sweeping ban of noncompete agreements. As Benesch previously highlighted in August, a federal district court in Texas permanently blocked the FTC’s attempt to ban noncompete agreements, determining that the ban exceeded the FTC’s authority and, thus, was an illegal attempt to expand the FTC’s rulemaking authority. The Texas Court also found that the ban was arbitrary and capricious and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. If it had been implemented, the FTC rule would have banned nearly all noncompete agreements between employers and employees as “unfair method[s] of competition.”
On October 18th, the FTC filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit is unlikely to reverse the Texas Court’s opinion. Many of the Biden Administration’s regulatory endeavors have been struck down by the Fifth Circuit in the past (such as the Department of Labor’s tip credit rule, which the Fifth Circuit vacated in August). Whether the FTC continues its litigation also could depend on the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, as the FTC previously voted 3-2 along party lines to approve the ban, with both Republican commissioners voting against the ban.
The notice of appeal does not, by itself, impact the status of the noncompete ban, and employers can continue to use noncompete agreements (subject to the many state law considerations that apply). However, employers should continue to review their noncompete practices as this litigation continues. Benesch attorneys are ready to assist employers in reviewing their noncompete agreements and practices and will continue to monitor the status of this litigation as it heads to the Fifth Circuit. For more information, please contact:
Margo Wolf O’Donnell at modonnell@beneschlaw.com or 312.212.4982.
Scott Humphrey at shumphrey@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6420.
Charles Leuin at cleuin@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6344.
Latest News
D.C. Circuit Rejects DOE’s Use of Emergency Authority to Prevent Coal Plant Retirement
The D.C. Circuit vacated the Department of Energy’s order compelling continued operation of Michigan’s J.H. Campbell coal plant under DOE’s emergency authority, finding that Section 202(c) is a narrow, last-resort power reserved for immediate grid-reliability emergencies, not longer-term resource planning.
New BIS “Affiliates Rule” Compliance Date is November 10 Unless Suspended by U.S.-China Truce
A new party screening requirement will soon impact compliance of international dealings unless the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Securities (“BIS”) issues a second extension of its effective date.
California’s New AI Law: What Legal Departments and Outside Counsel Need to Know
Newly enacted California Senate Bill 574 regulates how attorneys use generative AI by amending the California Code of Civil Procedure and requiring attorneys to personally verify every citation, whether sourced from AI or otherwise. It also holds law firms jointly responsible for sanctionable violations by their attorneys. The bill added a new section to the California Code of Civil Procedure (§ 1282.1), barring arbitrators from delegating their decision-making to generative AI.
Beyond Allulose: What Comes Next in Sugar-Related False Advertising Litigation?
The Franco decision has given plaintiffs a potential roadmap for challenging “Sugar Free,” “Zero Sugar” and similar claims when FDA guidance and existing regulations do not fully align.