Menu Close

Author: WorkCompAcademy

Time to File Applicant’s Attorney Malpractice Claim Tolled by Disability

WorkCompAcademy

Karynn S. Kelly worked at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. While there, she sustained injuries to her spine, and she retained Boxer & Gerson, LLP represent her in her workers’ compensation cases.

Kelly sued Boxer in October 2023, alleging various causes of action related to its representation. In an amended complaint, she alleged (1) breach of contract (failing to exercise the legal skill and expertise of competent attorneys); (2) professional negligence (failing to develop and implement case management strategies – including failing to negotiate a settlement with Lawrence Lab – or file a complaint against the medical examiner, and allowing the statute of limitations to expire on her claims); (3) unfair business practices (failing to take reasonable steps to prevent abuse from the examiner from occurring and concealing the abuse to maintain its public image); (4) breach of fiduciary duty; and (5) fraud.

The underlying facts she alleged supporting her case were categorized as follows:

– – Pressuring an Unfavorable Settlement: Boxer allegedly pressured Kelly to accept a settlement offer that required her to resign from her position at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and forgo expected retirement benefits, rather than vigorously representing her interests.
– – Failure to Address Inappropriate Conduct by a Medical Examiner: Boxer referred Kelly to a medical examiner who, during a December 2014 exam, allegedly engaged in inappropriate behavior (kissing her and fondling her breasts). Despite Kelly informing Boxer of this conduct in January 2015 and requesting a different examiner, Boxer allegedly disregarded her objections and required her to return to the same examiner in October 2015, where further inappropriate behavior allegedly occurred (kissing her hand and disclosing personal information). Boxer allegedly continued to rely on this examiner’s report, which concluded her January 2014 injury was not work-related, despite knowing about the misconduct.
– – Failure to Communicate and Attend Hearings: Between September 2017 and November 2019, Boxer allegedly failed to maintain communication with Kelly, did not attend her hearings or trials, and forced her to represent herself despite their attorney-client relationship.
– – Allowing Statute of Limitations to Expire: Boxer allegedly neglected to pursue Kelly’s workers’ compensation claims, allowing the statute of limitations on those claims to expire, which barred her from recovering compensation for her work-related injuries.

The trial court sustained Boxer’s demurrer to Kelly’s first amended complaint, dismissing her legal malpractice claims on the grounds that they were barred by the one-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.6(a). She filed her lawsuit in October 2023, well after the alleged wrongful acts occurred (primarily between 2014 and 2019) and after the termination of Boxer’s representation in November 2019. The trial court rejected Kelly’s argument for tolling the statute of limitations under section 340.6(a)(4), finding that her psychiatric medications and post-traumatic stress disorder did not excuse her delay in filing the complaint. The trial court also sustained the demurrer as to the fraud claim because Kelly failed to allege sufficient facts to support each element. Kelly does not challenge that decision on appeal.

Representing herself, Kelly appealed and contends the limitations period must be tolled because mental and physical disabilities restricted her ability to commence the action. (CCP § 340.6, subd. (a)(4)) The Court of Appeal agreed and reversed the trial court in the unpublished case of Kelly v Boxer & Gerson LLP -A171946 (September 2025).

“It is undisputed that CCP § 340.6(a) year statute of limitation governs Kelly’s claims for breach of contract, professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and unfair business practices. The claims necessarily arise from Boxer allegedly violating its professional obligations while providing services to Kelly.”

“On the other hand, the trial court erred by finding section 340.6 (a)(4) – tolling due to a disability restricting the ability to commence a legal action – inapplicable.”

“Such a disability may exist where a person is incapable of caring for their property, transacting business, or understanding the nature or effects of their actions (Alcott Rehabilitation Hospital v. Superior Court (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 94, 101), and it must concretely affect the plaintiff’s ability to sue.”

“Kelly sufficiently alleged her mental and physical disabilities and that they restricted her ability to file her complaint. Her permanent physical disabilities – after multiple spinal injuries requiring five surgeries — require two different daily medications affecting her ability to remain focused on critical matters. Specifically, they render her unable to personally provide for her care or finances, as well as to understand the need to file a complaint.”

“These episodes have lasted on a weekly and monthly basis for years, spanning 2013 through 2024. Kelly’s medical care giver reiterated these limitations, noting her physical and mental illnesses require opioid and psychotropic medications, resulting in her inability to remain alert, process information, or attend to her personal hygiene.”

“Kelly’s adult son has been caring for her since 2013, including managing all aspects of her personal care and finances; he notes she suffers from auditory and visual hallucinations. During those periods, she is afraid to leave her bedroom, groom herself, or take any medications to minimize her mental crises.”

“We find nothing in the case law – and Boxer does not cite anything – mandating such further explanation. In sum, we conclude the trial court erred by failing to toll the statute of limitations.”

View More

US Commercial Auto Insurance Has $10B Underwriting Loss

WorkCompAcademy

The U.S. commercial auto insurance line continues to burden the overall property and casualty (P/C) industry, accounting for more than $10 billion in net underwriting losses over the past two years, according to a new AM Best report.

The Best’s Market Segment Report, “Stuck in Reverse: Commercial Auto Losses Keep Mounting,” states that the segment’s rising loss severity, increasing claims costs and adverse prior-year loss reserve development continue to produce net calendar year underwriting losses for commercial auto insurers. The commercial auto insurance sector has now generated an underwriting loss for the 14th consecutive year. In fact, the losses are getting worse: total underwriting losses in 2024 were $4.9 billion dollars. Over the past 11 years, the average underwriting loss has been a little over $2.9 billion annually.

“One bright spot to note is that during the past decade, insurers have trimmed about six percentage points off their underwriting expense ratio for commercial auto insurance,” said Christopher Graham, senior industry analyst, AM Best. “While commercial auto insurers are not recognized as often as personal auto insurers for adopting and leveraging technology through their operations, commercial auto insurers have nevertheless made some strides in improving their efficiency.”

According to the report, the difference between auto liability and physical damage results has been stark and diverging. The underwriting expense ratio is relatively similar for the two coverages, with both improving by approximately three percentage points of improvements compared with the expense ratios six to seven years ago. The difference in the net loss and loss adjustment expense (LAE) ratio for the coverage parts, however, has typically been significant and far higher for liability coverage. The distinction between compulsory liability coverage and optional physical damage coverage may lead to insureds finding physical damage coverage not worth the cost. “Even if insureds find benefits in physical damage coverage, they may opt for higher deductibles to pay less for coverage,” Graham said.

The report also notes that despite significant rate increases, commercial auto insurers have not been able to offset rising loss severity driven by inflation, rising replacement costs due to technological advancements and rising labor costs related to repairs. “Adverse loss development has been a constant drain on commercial auto results and is getting worse,” said David Blades, associate director, AM Best.

To access the full copy of this market segment report, please visit http://www3.ambest.com/bestweek/purchase.asp?record_code=358186.

View More

Cal/OSHA to Investigate UPS Worker Killed by Boxes in Truck

WorkCompAcademy

UPS driver Shelma Reyna Guerrero was crushed to death while loading packages inside a cargo trailer at the UPS driver facility on Atlas Road in Richmond, California. Guerrero was working alone on September 21 inside the trailer around 4:15 p.m. when an avalanche of packages fell onto her.

She was discovered later by a co-worker who immediately called emergency services. At approximately 4:16 p.m., Richmond Police Department officers responded to reports of an industrial accident in the 1600 block of Atlas Road in Richmond.

The preliminary investigation indicates that an employee of the package delivery company was loading packages into a cargo trailer when several packages fell onto her. The Guerrero was alone inside the trailer at the time. A co-worker later discovered her and immediately called for emergency responders.

Despite life-saving efforts by first responders, the victim succumbed to their injuries at the scene. This incident is being investigated as an industrial accident.

On September 23, 2025, Cal/OSHA announced an investigation into the workplace fatality, with up to six months to review evidence and issue citations related to safety violations (e.g., package restraint and solo work protocols).

“We are deeply saddened by the passing of one of our team members,” the company said. “Our thoughts are with their family, friends and colleagues during this difficult time” UPS said in a statement to media sources. It also said it is fully cooperating with the authorities to get to the bottom of what happened.

Family members have launched a GoFundMe page to help cover funeral expenses. Esmeralda Ocampo, cousin of Guerrero, stated in the fundraiser that a machine malfunction caused the accident. “She was healthy, had no prior health issues,” Ocampo reportedly said to the Richmond Herald. Guerrero reportedly leaves behind five children.

View More

September 22, 2025 – News Podcast

WorkCompAcademy

Rene Thomas Folse, JD, Ph.D. is the host for this edition which reports on the following news stories: California to Pay $3.3M in FEHA Damages + $4.9M Attorney Fees. Uber Sued For $125M by DOJ for Riders’ Disability Discrimination. Published Opinion Sanctions LA Attorney for “AI Fabricated Authorities”. Feds Sue Inland Empire Health Plan (IEHP) for False Medi-Cal Claims. Oxnard Man Faces Felony Charges For Fraudulent Injury. CWCI Reports Functional Restoration Programs 59% More Costly. Stanford Study Shows Shift From AI as Tool to Physician Teammate. California Counties Face Skyrocketing Insurance Cost.

View More

Partial Summary Judgement Granted in Grimway Farms ADA Case

WorkCompAcademy

A U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California decision ruling that Grimmway Farms – purportedly the largest grower, producer, and shipper of carrots in the world – engaged in a pattern or practice of disability discrimination against farmworkers. The ruling comes after the State of California Civil Rights Department (CRD) filed a lawsuit against the farm in 2021. As a result of the decision, the case can now move forward to trial on potential monetary damages and other forms of relief for affected workers.

The plaintiff, California’s Civil Rights Department (CRD), sued defendant Grimmway Enterprises, Inc.(Case No. 2:21-cv-01552-DAD-AC) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). CRD alleges patterns or practices of disability discrimination against a group of over 600 employees referred to Grimmway’s “Interactive Process Section” (for handling disability accommodations). Claims include disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process, retaliation, unlawful interference, and failure to prevent discrimination/retaliation.

According to CRD, while some employees were able to use workers’ compensation benefits, as soon as those benefits expired, they faced a choice: take unpaid leave or get back to work without accommodations. As a result, hundreds of workers were allegedly deprived of their rights and many were effectively terminated.

“This decision is a major victory for disability rights and the rights of farmworkers across California,” said CRD Director Kevin Kish. “The court has ruled loud and clear that forcing injured workers into unpaid leave is disability discrimination. Here in California, farmworkers have rights, they are protected, and we will not shy away from fighting on their behalf.”

In a more than 50-page decision on cross motions for summary judgment, the federal court found that Grimmway Farms engaged in systemic disability discrimination by automatically placing disabled workers on unpaid leave when other reasonable accommodations were available. The court also ruled that CRD may pursue relief on a group-wide basis.

The case proceeds to trial on the issues unresolved by the cross summary judgment motions as follows:

– – ADA-based claim 1 (discrimination) re: unpaid leave.
– – ADA/FEHA claims 2-3 (accommodation/interactive process) re: unpaid leave, assistive technology, and reassignment.
– – ADA/FEHA claims 1-3 re: assistive technology and reassignment.
– – Claims 4-5 (retaliation/interference).
– – Claims 6-7 (failure to prevent discrimination/retaliation), except sexual harassment prevention.
– – Defendant’s remaining affirmative defenses (e.g., good faith, no discrimination).
– – Punitive damages (disputed).

According to a report by kvpr (NPR Network) Grimmway Farms representatives disagreed with the Civil Rights Division’s complaint and said the matter is not yet fully resolved.

“We firmly disagree with CRD’s characterizations of the court’s pre-trial decisions, noting that many of the motions were resolved in Grimmway’s favor,” Officials wrote to KVPR. “The allegations do not reflect the principles or values that guide our company, and we will respectfully see the matter through trial and the proper legal process.”

View More

UCSD Virtual Transfer of Care Clinic Cuts Readmissions by 26%

WorkCompAcademy

In a recent study, researchers at the University of California San Diego School of Medicine found that a UC San Diego Health telemedicine clinic for high-risk patients to be seen immediately after leaving the hospital resulted in less readmissions.

The study results, published in the Sept. 23, 2025 online edition of JMIR Medical Informatics, found the overall 30-day readmission rate for patients seen in the virtual transition of care clinic (VToC) was 14.9%, compared to 20.1% for the benchmark group.

“With our virtual transition of care clinic, we are providing patients with the right care, at the right place, at the right time. With the convenience of meeting virtually, we’re able to reach patients much more efficiently,” said Sarah Horman, MD, lead author of the study and professor of medicine at UC San Diego School of Medicine.

Across the nation, hospital readmissions pose a significant burden on patients, health care providers and medical systems, with an estimated annual cost of $17 billion. To address this challenge, a team of physicians and executive leadership at UC San Diego Health implemented the virtual clinic to support clinical management and specialty care navigation for patients being discharged in the health system.

Launched in 2021, the virtual transition of care clinic is supported by 12 hospitalists, two medical assistants, one pharmacist and an on-demand interpreter service. Visits were occasionally converted to telephone encounters when patients faced technical challenges.

During the study, a standardized hand-off was routed to the patient’s primary care provider and relevant specialists that summarized the reason for hospitalization, follow-up care and timing recommendations. For patients that experienced issues post-discharge, expedited calls were made from the virtual care team to the patient’s primary care provider to ensure the patient was seen in-person quicker.

“When telemedicine first began, there was concern it would further increase health disparities, especially in vulnerable patient groups. However, through our research, we have found the opposite as the virtual clinic reaches patients more effectively,” said Horman, hospitalist and affiliate faculty at the Joan and Irwin Jacobs Center for Health Innovation at UC San Diego Health.

According to Horman, the clinic addresses three main themes that are paramount in a critical care setting: access to and availability of medications, patient and caregiver understanding in the care plan, and proper navigation with primary care and/or specialty care programs.

“Our goal is to hardwire this linkage in the care chain between the hospital team and primary care in order to help expedite support during that very sensitive, post-hospital period of time,” said Horman. “As a result, patient outcomes are improving while they recover at home and hospitals have capacity to take care of the next patient in need of critical care.”

The virtual transition of care clinic and corresponding study involved more than 25,000 participants cared for at UC San Diego Health from Sept. 1, 2021 to Sept. 17, 2024. Of the participants, 2,314 were seen in the virtual clinic and 23,129 had standard follow-up care as the study’s benchmark group.

The typical time a patient is seen by their primary care physician after a hospital stay is two to four weeks. Through this clinic, patients who are considered moderate or high risk in terms of health outcomes are seen within a week after discharge.

“Our clinic is a one-time, virtual visit with a patient immediately after their hospital stay to ensure we’re doing all we can to mitigate risk,” added Horman.

The study relied on the LACE+ index to identify patients at high risk for hospital readmission or complications after discharge. LACE stands for length of stay, acuity of admission, comorbidity and emergency department visits, and considers certain factors such underlying health conditions, a patient’s age or sex and previous admissions.

“The use of LACE+ underscores the importance of data-driven and patient-centric strategies in enhancing patient outcomes,” said Horman. “By using this tool, we were able to target follow-up care to those most likely to benefit. This approach helped improve care transitions and reduce avoidable hospital visits.”

Horman adds that the results from this initiative are promising as health systems work toward improving population health, enhancing the care experience, reducing cost and advancing care equity.

The virtual transition of care clinic at UC San Diego Health is ongoing and currently seeing patients cared for at Hillcrest and Jacobs Medical Centers, with plans to launch at East Campus Medical Center soon.

Co-authors of the study include Milla Kviatkovsky, Edward Castillo, Patricia S. Maysent, Chad VanDenBerg, John Bell, and Christopher A. Longhurst, all at UC San Diego Health.

View More

New H-1B Restrictions Cause California Tech Industry Chaos

WorkCompAcademy

On September 19, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued a presidential proclamation titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” targeting perceived abuses of the H-1B visa program, which allows temporary entry for specialty occupation workers, particularly in STEM fields. The proclamation argues that the program has been exploited by employers – especially IT outsourcing firms – to displace American workers with lower-paid foreign labor, suppressing wages, exacerbating unemployment among U.S. graduates (e.g., 6.1% for computer science majors aged 22-27), and posing national security risks by discouraging Americans from pursuing tech careers. It cites examples of major tech layoffs coinciding with H-1B approvals, such as one company laying off 15,000 while securing 5,000 visas.

Key provisions include:

– – Entry Restriction: Effective 12:01 a.m. EDT on September 21, 2025, H-1B petitions for workers outside the U.S. require a $100,000 payment (per the proclamation) to be approved or supplemented; without it, entries are restricted for 12 months (expiring September 21, 2026, unless extended). This applies only to new entries post-effective date and does not retroactively affect existing visa holders or approved petitions.
– – Exceptions: The Secretary of Homeland Security can waive the restriction for individuals, companies, or industries in the “national interest” without security threats (e.g., critical sectors).
– – Implementation: Employers must document the fee before filing; USCIS and State Department will verify and deny non-compliant petitions. Guidance prevents B-1/B-2 visa misuse for early H-1B starts before October 1, 2026.
– – Further Actions: Directs the Secretary of Labor to revise prevailing wage levels upward via rulemaking; Secretary of Homeland Security to prioritize high-wage, high-skilled H-1B admissions. A joint agency report on extension is due 30 days after the next H-1B lottery.

The policy invokes INA sections 212(f) and 215(a) to protect U.S. economic and security interests, with no impact on current H-1B workers’ status or travel, per subsequent clarifications.

Effects on California Employers

California, home to Silicon Valley and the Bay Area’s tech ecosystem, relies heavily on H-1B visas – accounting for about 40% of all issuances annually, with firms like Google, Meta, and Apple sponsoring thousands. The $100,000 fee (a 20-50x increase from prior $2,000-$5,000 costs) is expected to impose steep financial and operational burdens, particularly on startups and mid-sized firms, while sparking panic, legal scrutiny, and talent pipeline disruptions. Here’s a breakdown based on recent media analyses:

– – Cost Escalation and Hiring Disruptions: The fee applies per new petition, potentially adding millions in costs for high-volume sponsors (e.g., a firm filing 1,000 H-1Bs faces $100 million). This could force California tech employers to slash foreign hires, pivot to domestic talent amid a reported 3.02% unemployment spike in computer occupations, or pass costs to workers via lower salaries – exacerbating wage suppression the policy aims to fix. Bay Area experts predict “major disruptions” to innovation, as startups – already cash-strapped – may abandon H-1B recruitment altogether.
– – Panic and Immediate Chaos: The announcement triggered a “fast and furious” rush of H-1B workers abroad to reenter the U.S. before September 21, with flights booked en masse and aborted international trips. Tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon (with major California footprints) urged employees to stay put, fearing reentry denials despite clarifications. Immigration attorneys reported “aborted takeoffs” and confusion, delaying projects and straining HR teams.
– – Disproportionate Hit to Startups and SMEs: Silicon Valley startups, which sponsor ~20% of H-1Bs but lack big-firm resources, fear being “put in a bind” and “shut out” of global talent, hindering growth in AI, software, and biotech. One venture-backed firm estimated a 30% drop in engineering hires, potentially stalling funding rounds.
– – Broader Economic and Legal Repercussions: California’s Attorney General criticized the policy as having an “adverse impact” on the state’s $500B+ tech economy, vowing to assess legal violations (e.g., under INA or equal protection). Business groups like the Chamber of Commerce predict lawsuits, while supporters argue it could boost U.S. worker employment by 6-11% in tech. Long-term, it risks eroding U.S. competitiveness, as foreign talent eyes alternatives like Canada.

Overall, while large employers may absorb costs via the national interest waiver, smaller California firms face the brunt, with effects unfolding in the FY2026 lottery (March 2026). According to Politico the demand for H-1B visas far surpasses the number available, which Congress has capped at 65,000 annually plus an additional 20,000 for people with advanced degrees.

In the 2024 fiscal year, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approved nearly 400,000 employment petitions, with more than 70 percent coming from India and 12 percent from China. H-1B visas are awarded via lottery.

View More

Irvine Couple Arrested for 21 Counts of Medical Insurance Fraud

WorkCompAcademy

Rebecca Juarez, 39, and Juan Pablo Rodriguez, 31, both of Irvine were arrested on two counts of conspiracy, 21 counts of medical insurance fraud, and 21 counts of identity fraud for allegedly running an insurance fraud scheme where the couple stole more than 21 patients’ identities and submitted false insurance claims.

Investigators with the California Department of Insurance began an investigation after several Orange County residents reported the unauthorized use of their personal information to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department when they noted charges on their explanation of benefits provided by their health insurers for medical testing and treatment they never received.

The investigation revealed that Juarez, on behalf of Rodriguez, unlawfully accessed the computerized medical records system of a Mission Viejo medical practice where she worked. Juarez allegedly stole the personally identifying information of over 21 patients, which she then shared with Rodriguez who had access to a San Jose medical practice’s billing system. Rodriguez created false medical records for medical testing including COVID tests that were never performed. Rodriguez submitted those records through the San Jose medical practice’s insurance billing system resulting in the submission of fraudulent insurance claims.

Investigators determined that the unauthorized billing charges were submitted to various medical insurers between August and November 2023. The total estimated intended loss to the insurance companies exceeded $10,000.

On September 16, 2025, both Rodriguez and Juarez were arraigned on a criminal complaint filed in the Orange County Superior Court, and granted conditional releases. The couple are due back in court December 3, 2025. The Orange County District Attorney’s Office is prosecuting this case.  

View More

Westlaw Copyright Suit Win vs First AI Competitor on Appeal

WorkCompAcademy

The case Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH and West Publishing Corporation v. Ross Intelligence Inc., No. 25-2153, is an interlocutory appeal pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

West Publishing Corporation, a subsidiary of Thomson Reuters, is a leading provider of legal research tools, notably the Westlaw database. It holds a significant share of the U.S. legal research market, estimated at 40-50% based on industry reports and its dominance alongside competitors like LexisNexis. The company serves millions of legal professionals, offering access to over 28 million case headnotes, statutes, and other legal materials. Exact revenue and employee figures are not publicly disclosed, but Thomson Reuters’ broader legal division reported $7.2 billion in revenue for 2024, with Westlaw as a core component. Its market strength stems from comprehensive content, proprietary annotations, and integration with legal workflows.

In 2014, Ross Intelligence Inc., built ROSS the world’s first AI legal search engine that allowed the public to ask a question in plain English and returned ranked excerpts from judicial opinions as answers. As part of training this engine, Ross paid for 25,000 legal memoranda. Each memo featured one question and four to six answers. As Ross claims it later learned, the questions in those memoranda were developed from a small fraction of Westlaw’s millions of headnotes – what Ross claims are verbatim or close-to-verbatim quotes from uncopyrightable judicial opinions.

Ross is no longer actively operating as a company. It ceased operations in 2021 amid the ongoing copyright litigation with Thomson Reuters, which drained its resources, and is now considered a deadpooled entity. The company raised approximately $8.82 million in funding prior to shutdown but has had no reported revival or new activities since. Its website remains online with outdated “About Us” content from its founding era, but no indications of current functionality. The recent 2025 court ruling and appellate briefing are handled through legal proceedings, not business operations.

This interlocutory appeal stems from a 2020 copyright infringement lawsuit originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (No. 1:20-cv-00613). At its core, the dispute involves allegations that Ross Intelligence unlawfully scraped and copied thousands of proprietary “headnotes” (concise summaries of legal points from court opinions) from Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw database to train its AI-powered legal research tool, which aimed to compete with Westlaw.

Ross countered that its actions constituted fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107, arguing the headnotes were not sufficiently original to be copyrightable and that the use was transformative for AI training.

On February 11, 2025, U.S. District Judge Colm F. Connolly granted partial summary judgment in favor of Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement for 2,243 specific headnotes, finding Ross had willfully copied them. The court rejected Ross’s fair use defense after weighing the four statutory factors: Purpose and Character of Use (Factor 1) – Nature of the Copyrighted Work (Factor 2) – Amount and Substantiality (Factor 3) – Effect on the Potential Market (Factor 4).

Overall, the court concluded fair use did not apply, denied Ross’s cross-motions, and rejected ancillary defenses like merger doctrine and copyright misuse. This marked one of the first rulings rejecting fair use for AI training on copyrighted materials. Ross was certified for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) due to the substantial legal questions involved.

The Third Circuit docket opened on June 24, 2025, however briefing was delayed multiple times at Ross’s request, with the opening brief due September 22, 2025.

In its September 22, 2025, opening brief (filed in both sealed and redacted versions), Ross urges reversal, calling the district ruling the “first to examine fair use in the context of AI training materials” and arguing it contains “critical errors.” Key Ross arguments include:

– – Headnotes Not Copyrightable: They are near-verbatim quotes from uncopyrightable judicial opinions, lacking originality under precedents like Banks v. Manchester (1888) and Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (2020), which prohibit monopolizing the law. Protecting them would violate the merger doctrine.
– – Transformative Use: Ross’s AI training created a “spectacularly transformative” tool for semantic search, advancing technology without superseding Westlaw’s market – citing Authors Guild v. Google (2015) and Google v. Oracle (2021) for intermediate copying in innovation.
– – Minimal Amount Used: Only ~0.08% of headnotes (25,000 out of 28+ million) were involved, transformed into numerical data without retaining expressive content.
– – No Market Harm: No evidence of substitution; Westlaw doesn’t license headnotes for AI or sell them separately, and any impact is from lawful competition, not copyright infringement. – – Broader Implications: Affirming would stifle AI progress, harming public access to justice and U.S. innovation, as evidenced by Ross’s shutdown due to litigation costs.

Thomson Reuters’ response brief is due later, per the briefing schedule. No oral argument date has been set, and the case is actively monitored for its potential to shape fair use doctrine in AI copyright disputes. The district court proceedings are stayed pending appeal.

While no other companies have been directly sued yet, emerging players without exclusive licenses from incumbents like Thomson Reuters or LexisNexis could be vulnerable if their models ingest similar proprietary data.

View More

UC Davis Awarded $2.8 Million Grant to Create AI Pathology Tool

WorkCompAcademy

UC Davis Health gastroenterology researchers have received a $2.8 million grant from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to study the mechanisms of cell therapy using an AI-based digital pathology tool.

The four-year study will further investigate regenerative therapies, particularly using stem cells, to help treat chronic inflammatory conditions. It will also focus on how AI can assist pathologists in scoring damaged and affected tissue more quantitatively.

“We’re excited to be advancing cell-based therapies while also developing new tools to more precisely measure and assess tissue damage,” said Maneesh Dave, professor of gastroenterology and principal investigator of the study. “By deepening our understanding of these treatments, we hope to pave the way for novel therapies that could transform how chronic inflammatory conditions are managed.”

In earlier studies, Dave and his team investigated the therapeutic effects and mechanisms of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) as treatments for Crohn’s disease. Their research revealed that MSCs promote sustained tissue healing through a two-stage process.

As part of the new grant, Dave will collaborate with Satish Viswanath at Emory University to develop an innovative tool called the Inflammation Digital Pathology Tool. This AI-powered platform aims to revolutionize how researchers analyze tissue samples in studies of intestinal inflammation.

The team is leveraging a collection of digitized histopathology slides from mouse models, including those used in MSC research and other studies of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). These slides, scanned at ultra-high resolution, form a growing database of over 700 samples, with plans to expand to more than 1,000.

Traditionally, pathologists look at tissue slides and estimate how much of the area is affected. While this has long been considered the gold standard for assessing disease and treatment response, it is a time-consuming and subjective process that relies heavily on human judgement.

To ensure accuracy, the team is working closely with a veterinary pathologist to validate the AI’s findings and refine the system. The hope is that the tool will not only match human-level precision but also uncover subtle patterns that the human eye may miss.

Additional collaborators on the grant include Richard Levenson, professor of pathology and Laboratory Medicine; William Murphy, distinguished professor of immunology; and Pedro Ruivo, health sciences clinical assistant professor.

View More