Mylawcle, 5050 CAROTHERS PKWY STE 104 PMB 285, Franklin, TN (2026)

10/20/2026

🔹 Navigating Summary Judgment and Keeping Your Case on the Right Course Through Trial and Beyond 🔹

Most lawyers treat summary judgment as a briefing exercise that begins when the motion is drafted—this program rejects that premise. Effective advocacy starts at the pleadings, with a clear theory of the issue and an evidentiary record built to carry it. Develop the theory late, and discovery closes without the evidence that proves it; let the opponent’s arguments dictate the structure, and the strongest affirmative case disappears from the presentation; hand the court a cluttered record, and the path to the desired ruling becomes hard to follow—on either side of the motion. This CLE delivers five universal keys: a practical, repeatable method for organizing the issues and evidence, demonstrating how the record satisfies or fails to satisfy the governing legal requirements, and briefing the motion so the desired ruling is the easy one to grant—judgment work that serves the lawyer filing the motion and the lawyer defeating it alike.

👤 Speakers:
Christopher M. Drury | Drury Law Firm
Allen Bonner | South Florida Appeals, PA

Key Topics Include:
✅ Early case strategy: identifying the legal and factual propositions that must be established or contested from day one
✅ Building the record strategically through pleadings, written discovery, depositions, and other evidence
✅ Persuasive brief organization and integrating law and evidence while anticipating opposing arguments
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 October 23, 2026 | 11:00
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/navigating-summary-judgment-and-keeping-your-case-on-the-right-course-through-trial-and-beyond/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

09/16/2026

🔹 Piercing the Corporate Veil: Pleading the New Standards and Reaching Sister Entities 🔹

Veil-piercing law is moving faster than it has in a decade—the Supreme Court's Dewberry decision, the Second Circuit's 2025 ruling in Citibank v. Aralpa, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Mortimer enterprise liability framework have redrawn how claims against affiliated entities must be built. The stakes are immediate: plead bare factors instead of supporting facts and the complaint dies at dismissal; sue only the named debtor and Dewberry blocks affiliate profits; chase an LLC without a charging-order strategy and the exclusivity defense ends the claim—while standards diverge sharply across Texas, Tennessee, New York, North Carolina, and the federal courts. This CLE delivers practitioner work product: a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction pleading framework, guidance on mapping corporate structures before filing, strategies for navigating charging-order exclusivity, and a post-judgment discovery approach built to support reverse piercing and enterprise liability claims.

👤 Speaker:
Jeffrey M. Eilender | Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP

Key Topics Include:
✅ Dewberry baseline and jurisdictional pleading pathways across Texas, Tennessee, New York, North Carolina, and federal courts
✅ Reverse veil piercing after Citibank v. Aralpa and enterprise liability under Pennsylvania's Mortimer framework
✅ Charging-order exclusivity, post-judgment discovery, and avoiding fraudulent transfer overlap mistakes
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 September 23, 2026 | 1:00 PM – 3:10 PM ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/piercing-the-corporate-veil-pleading-the-new-standards-and-reaching-sister-entities/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

09/10/2026

🔹 When a Green Card Employee Is Stopped at the Airport: Employer Duties After Blanche v. Lau 🔹

The riskiest thing your client's green card employee will do this year is come home—and after the Supreme Court's June 2026 decision in Blanche v. Lau, a routine reentry can trigger a parole determination that strips work authorization overnight. With CBP's expanded biometric entry/exit program now in full effect since December 2025, the six exceptions under INA § 101(a)(13)(C) carry consequences employers feel directly: an old criminal record can convert a simple reentry into a parole, an incorrectly accepted temporary I-551 stamp can turn the I-9 file into the violation, and a poorly worded document request can invite a discrimination claim. This program equips attorneys with a pre-travel screening protocol, a risk-factor checklist, and scenario maps for four distinct reentry outcomes so counsel can act before the clock starts running rather than after the employee raises the alarm. This is practitioner judgment built around a holding only months old—not doctrine any research tool can summarize for you.

👤 Speakers:
Kate Kalmykov | Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Courtney Brooks | Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Key Topics Include:
✅ How Blanche v. Lau (June 2026) turns a routine LPR reentry into a direct employer obligation
✅ Building a pre-travel screening protocol around the six § 101(a)(13)(C) risk factors while preserving privilege
✅ I-9 reverification traps, temporary I-551 stamp rules, and anti-discrimination guardrails after a border parole
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 Thursday, September 17, 2026 | 1:00pm – 3:10pm ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/when-a-green-card-employee-is-stopped-at-the-airport-employer-duties-after-blanche-v-lau/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

09/09/2026

🔹 Reading the Pixel: Technical Fluency for Privacy and Ad Tech Litigators 🔹

Pixel and ad tech litigation has moved past the pleadings, and courts now test wiretap, C**A, and VPPA claims against the real technical mechanics of pixels, cookies, and session replay—meaning attorneys who can't read the underlying data flows are arguing blind. Misread what a pixel actually transmits and the interception element collapses; treat form inputs as addressing data and a content claim fails under C**A and ECPA; after Popa, standing now turns on the specific type of data collected, and subpoenas to ad tech platforms like Meta and Google routinely draw trade-secret and relevance objections that stall discovery. This two-session program builds technical fluency first, then converts it directly into proof: attendees learn to identify exactly what a pixel transmits and map HAR files, packet captures, and server logs to the statutory elements of wiretap and C**A claims. They leave with authentication pathways under FRE 901 and 902 and a working forensic discovery and class certification framework built for pixel litigation as courts are actually deciding it.

👤 Speakers:
Matthew D. Pearson | Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz
Peter A. Devlin | Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz
Regina Gerhardt | Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz
Megan Mallonee | Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz

Key Topics Include:
✅ Reading pixel architecture, cookie syncing, and session replay to identify what data is transmitted and how it triggers wiretap claims
✅ Mapping HAR files, packet captures, and server logs to the interception, content, and standing elements of C**A claims after Popa
✅ Authenticating pixel and ad tech evidence under FRE 901 and 902 and building forensic discovery workflows for class certification
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 September 16, 2026 | 1:00 PM – 3:10 PM ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/reading-the-pixel-technical-fluency-for-privacy-and-ad-tech-litigators/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

**A

08/31/2026

🔹 The Phrase That Cost DivX Its Patent: Claim Drafting and Construction After Netflix v. DivX 🔹

The Federal Circuit's February 2026 decision in Netflix, Inc. v. DivX, LLC is a warning to every patent drafter—a single grammatical ambiguity unraveled DivX's patent rights across prosecution, PTAB inter partes review, and Federal Circuit appeal. Leave a modifier's referent unclear and courts resolve it under the nearest-reasonable-referent rule; miss an antecedent-basis error and invite indefiniteness under Nautilus; overlook an implicit construction in a Board decision and lose the appellate hook on de novo review. This CLE turns the DivX failure into practitioner work product—delivering claim-drafting and prosecution strategies built for later litigation, command of interpretive canons, and concrete IPR strategies for petitioners and patent owners across institution, trial, and appeal.

👤 Speakers:
Jennifer H. Wu | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP
Megan F. Raymond | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP
Jennifer Rea Deneault | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP
Stephen Accursio Maniscalco | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP
Joshua Reich | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP
Ariella Barel | Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP

Key Topics Include:
✅ Interpretive canons, the nearest-reasonable-referent rule, and antecedent-basis errors under Nautilus
✅ Claim-drafting and prosecution strategies that prevail in later construction disputes
✅ Litigating construction in PTAB, district courts, and Federal Circuit after Google v. EcoFactor and Axonics v. Medtronic
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 September 10, 2026 | 12:00 PM – 2:10 PM ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/the-phrase-that-cost-divx-its-patent-claim-drafting-and-construction-after-netflix-v-divx/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

08/26/2026

🔹 Section 1983 in Theory and Practice: Qualified Immunity's Shaky Foundations and the Life Cycle of a Civil Rights Case 🔹

Qualified immunity has shaped civil rights litigation for decades, and most practitioners treat it as settled law — but recent scholarship argues the doctrine actually contradicts the original text of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and lacks the historical grounding courts have long assumed. That instability matters at every stage of a case: plead a § 1983 claim and qualified immunity frames the fight from day one, survive dismissal and an interlocutory appeal can freeze the litigation for months or years, and bring a Monell claim against a municipality and proving it becomes the central battle. This program pairs hands-on practice with hard theory, walking attorneys through the full life cycle of a civil rights suit — from pleading through trial — before turning to test qualified immunity itself against its text, its history, and its policy justifications. Led by veteran civil rights litigator William Most, whose appellate arguments include Hicks v. LeBlanc and Grant v. LeBlanc before the Fifth Circuit, attendees leave with a stage-by-stage litigation framework and a textualist case against the defense that no case summary can replace.

👤 Speaker:
William Most | Most & Associates

Key Topics Include:
✅ Navigating qualified immunity defenses and interlocutory appeals that can freeze a § 1983 suit at every stage of litigation
✅ Proving Monell claims against municipalities and locating that proof within the life cycle of the case
✅ The textualist challenge to qualified immunity — how it contradicts the original text of Section 1983 and lacks historical support
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 Monday, August 31, 2026 | 1:00pm – 3:10pm ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/section-1983-in-theory-and-practice-qualified-immunitys-shaky-foundations-and-the-life-cycle-of-a-civil-rights-case/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

08/24/2026

🔹 Witness Preparation and Expert Investigations in the AI Era 🔹

One unsupervised AI session with a witness can cost you the privilege — and no one has to ask permission first. ABA Formal Opinions 508 and 512 now set the ethical terms for attorney AI use in witness prep, and United States v. Heppner establishes exactly what happens to privilege when a witness runs AI-assisted rehearsal unsupervised. Choose the wrong platform and confidential facts leave your control; miss a jurisdiction's expert disclosure requirement and the opinion is exposed. This program is built to cover both sides of the AI-era record: litigators leave with compliance protocols that travel across jurisdictions — platform criteria, pre-engagement AI instructions, supervision of AI-generated prep materials, and the AI questions a witness should expect at deposition — while experts (and the counsel who retain them) leave with a practical, seasoned-expert framework for using AI in technical investigations, digital evidence review, and research without compromising the credibility or defensibility of the resulting report.

👤 Speakers:
Katherine B. Forrest | Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Bill Hartzer | Hartzer Consulting

Key Topics Include:
✅ How ABA Formal Opinions 508 and 512, read together, change what counsel must disclose and supervise before AI touches witness preparation
✅ The privilege consequences of unsupervised witness AI use under United States v. Heppner — and the pre-engagement instructions that prevent it
✅ AI-assisted expert witness investigations — research, digital evidence, and documentation practices that keep AI-assisted work defensible on cross
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 Monday, August 31, 2026 | 12:00pm – 2:10pm ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/witness-preparation-and-expert-investigations-in-the-ai-era/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

08/19/2026

🔹 GGRF Litigation and the Future of Federal Climate Funding: Grant Terminations, Impoundment, and Client Remedies 🔹

Congressionally authorized climate funding was suspended and terminated mid-project, and the disputes now unfolding among the EPA, Citibank, and grant recipients over the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund have become the test case for how far federal spending power can be pulled back after the money is committed. Challenge a termination and counsel confront agency authority, federal grant rights, and appropriations limits; plead the case and jurisdiction and sovereign immunity meet you before the merits ever do; win the argument and the practical limits on remedies still leave grantees, subrecipients, and lenders exposed while the doctrine settles. This program traces how the GGRF's structure shapes the current disputes and works through the termination-challenge theories, administrative law, appropriations and impoundment issues, and the constitutional arguments they support. Attendees leave able to read the GGRF docket against the doctrines driving it and to counsel funding-dependent clients on preserving their rights while the law remains unsettled.

👤 Speakers:
Kristin E. Niver | Robinson & Cole
David A. Super | Georgetown University Law Center

Key Topics Include:
✅ Tracing the GGRF's structure and the relationships among the EPA, Citibank, and grant recipients driving the current disputes
✅ Evaluating termination-challenge theories through agency authority, federal grant rights, appropriations limits, and impoundment doctrine
✅ Navigating jurisdiction and sovereign immunity as threshold issues, and counseling grantees, subrecipients, and lenders on preserving remedies
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 August 25, 2026 | 1:00 PM – 3:10 PM ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/ggrf-litigation-and-the-future-of-federal-climate-funding-grant-terminations-impoundment-and-client-remedies/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

08/18/2026

🔹 The Dexcom Three-Track Template for Medical Device Litigation 🔹

In March 2025, FDA issued Warning Letter MARCS-CMS 700835 to Dexcom, followed by Class I Recall Notices in June 2025 and October 2025 — and read together, that enforcement record forms a single evidentiary package capable of supporting two entirely distinct litigation tracks. This program teaches attorneys how to convert that record into practitioner work product: an intake workflow for hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia injury cases built on FDA MAUDE adverse event data and recall serial-number matching across Dexcom G6, G7, and Abbott FreeStyle Libre 3 sensors. The pleading stakes are unforgiving — a state claim that adds to federal requirements is preempted under 21 U.S.C. § 360k(a), fraud-on-the-agency theories are barred by Buckman, and a no-injury refund class that ignores TransUnion loses standing before it starts. Attendees will master the parallel-claim framework required to survive both express and implied preemption, then pivot the same FDA record into class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) and consumer-protection claims across California, New York, and Florida, with 2026 updates throughout.

👤 Speakers:
Moze Cowper | Cowper Law
Adam J. Levitt | DiCello Levitt
David A. Simon | Northeastern University School of Law

Key Topics Include:
✅ Reading the March 2025 FDA Warning Letter (MARCS-CMS 700835) and the June and October 2025 Class I Recall Notices as one unified evidentiary package
✅ Pleading parallel claims that clear express preemption under 21 U.S.C. § 360k(a) and implied preemption under Buckman
✅ The consumer refund pivot — Rule 23(b)(3) certification, Article III standing after TransUnion, and CA/NY/FL consumer-protection claims
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 Tuesday, August 25, 2026 | 1:00pm – 3:10pm ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/the-dexcom-three-track-template-for-medical-device-litigation/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

08/17/2026

🔹 Legal AI in 2026: From Chatbots to AI Agents in Law Practice 🔹

Legal AI has moved past the chat window—it's now multi-step agents embedded across transactions, disputes and investigations, and recurring practice work, and AI-generated work product is increasingly scrutinized in court. The stakes are concrete: select the wrong model and legal analysis suffers, skip verification and hallucinations reach the final work product, mishandle client documents and confidential information gets exposed. This program cuts through the hype to show what's real, what's emerging, and what's overclaimed, giving attorneys a working playbook for when GPT-5.5, Claude 5, or Gemini 3.5 performs best for drafting, long-document review, and investigative work. Attendees leave with practical approaches for discovery, chronologies, and deposition outlines, plus verification workflows that document attorney oversight and hold up to scrutiny.

👤 Speakers:
Danielle Benecke | Baker McKenzie
Adam G. Gutbezahl | Ruberto, Israel & Weiner, P.C.

Key Topics Include:
✅ Matching GPT-5.5, Claude 5, and Gemini 3.5 to specific legal tasks—drafting, long-document review, and investigative work
✅ Using AI to organize productions, identify key themes, and accelerate first-pass document review in discovery
✅ Building verification workflows that document attorney review, catch hallucinations, and protect privileged client information
✅ And more!

📍 Live Video-Broadcast
🗓 August 24, 2026 | 1:00 PM – 3:10 PM ET
🔗 Register Here:
https://mylawcle.com/products/legal-ai-in-2026-from-chatbots-to-ai-agents-in-law-practice/

👉 Find this session and more—live, on-demand, and replays—at mylawcle.com.

Mylawcle

10/20/2026

09/16/2026

09/10/2026

09/09/2026

08/31/2026

08/26/2026

08/24/2026

08/19/2026

08/18/2026

08/17/2026

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request