<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/stylesheet.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:podcast="https://podcastindex.org/namespace/1.0">
  <channel>
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://feeds.transistor.fm/ropes-gray-in-conversation" title="MP3 Audio"/>
    <atom:link rel="hub" href="https://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/"/>
    <podcast:podping usesPodping="true"/>
    <title>Ropes &amp; Gray In Conversation</title>
    <generator>Transistor (https://transistor.fm)</generator>
    <itunes:new-feed-url>https://feeds.transistor.fm/ropes-gray-in-conversation</itunes:new-feed-url>
    <description>AI-generated conversations based on our most recent legal updates.</description>
    <copyright>© 2026</copyright>
    <podcast:guid>a3c66c43-2402-542a-9123-5b1a65cd4853</podcast:guid>
    <podcast:locked>yes</podcast:locked>
    <language>en</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 10:16:13 -0400</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 10:17:42 -0400</lastBuildDate>
    <link>https://www.ropesgray.com</link>
    
    <itunes:category text="Business"/>
    <itunes:category text="News">
      <itunes:category text="Business News"/>
    </itunes:category>
    <itunes:type>episodic</itunes:type>
    <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
    <itunes:image href="https://img.transistorcdn.com/BiQS99WI47Jnj9FAi321gz5P_Rh8H2GYn1oPrXg6Cog/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:1400/h:1400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS9jMWE4/M2I0MWNlZGI3ZWYz/MjljZGYyMzc4YmNk/OWNjZS5qcGc.jpg"/>
    <itunes:summary>AI-generated conversations based on our most recent legal updates.</itunes:summary>
    <itunes:subtitle>AI-generated conversations based on our most recent legal updates..</itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
    <itunes:owner>
      <itunes:name>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:name>
      <itunes:email>Podcasts@ropesgray.com</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
    <itunes:complete>No</itunes:complete>
    <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Staff Greenlights Directed Voting Programs for Funds</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Staff Greenlights Directed Voting Programs for Funds</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">4222c507-080c-4de1-967a-2ace90e12e4f</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/4f240517</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode covers the SEC’s September 2026 no-action letter to the Mutual Fund Directors Forum, explaining the approval of a “Directed Voting Program” for mutual funds, how it incorporates retail voting frameworks and governance safeguards under the 1940 Act, and what it means for fund shareholders amid rising proxy campaign costs.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/sec-staff-greenlights-directed-voting-programs-for-funds</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode covers the SEC’s September 2026 no-action letter to the Mutual Fund Directors Forum, explaining the approval of a “Directed Voting Program” for mutual funds, how it incorporates retail voting frameworks and governance safeguards under the 1940 Act, and what it means for fund shareholders amid rising proxy campaign costs.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/sec-staff-greenlights-directed-voting-programs-for-funds</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2026 10:51:32 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/4f240517/488de693.mp3" length="4413367" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>276</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode covers the SEC’s September 2026 no-action letter to the Mutual Fund Directors Forum, explaining the approval of a “Directed Voting Program” for mutual funds, how it incorporates retail voting frameworks and governance safeguards under the 1940 Act, and what it means for fund shareholders amid rising proxy campaign costs.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/sec-staff-greenlights-directed-voting-programs-for-funds</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Ninth Circuit Rules Generative AI Outputs Are Not "Stripped Copies" Under the DMCA</title>
      <itunes:title>Ninth Circuit Rules Generative AI Outputs Are Not "Stripped Copies" Under the DMCA</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">229f0299-582b-4044-ae54-ed7503c17537</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/3dfdae81</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Ninth Circuit’s September 2026 decision in <em>Dovi v. GitHub, Inc.</em>, exploring how the DMCA applies to generative AI coding tools and what the ruling means for developers, enterprises, and investors. </p><p> To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/ninth-circuit-rules-generative-ai-outputs-are-not-stripped-copies-under-the-dmca</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Ninth Circuit’s September 2026 decision in <em>Dovi v. GitHub, Inc.</em>, exploring how the DMCA applies to generative AI coding tools and what the ruling means for developers, enterprises, and investors. </p><p> To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/ninth-circuit-rules-generative-ai-outputs-are-not-stripped-copies-under-the-dmca</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/3dfdae81/2fe5bac3.mp3" length="4374078" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>274</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Ninth Circuit’s September 2026 decision in <em>Dovi v. GitHub, Inc.</em>, exploring how the DMCA applies to generative AI coding tools and what the ruling means for developers, enterprises, and investors. </p><p> To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/09/ninth-circuit-rules-generative-ai-outputs-are-not-stripped-copies-under-the-dmca</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DOJ's New National Fraud Enforcement Division Signals Where It Will Focus in Inaugural Memorandum</title>
      <itunes:title>DOJ's New National Fraud Enforcement Division Signals Where It Will Focus in Inaugural Memorandum</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e2297a93-1b3f-492c-8cbd-0d09459da320</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/7b4ed9b3</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Department of Justice's new National Fraud Enforcement Division, highlighting its data-driven approach to targeting fraud against taxpayer dollars and advising companies in high-risk industries to proactively strengthen compliance and data analytics.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/dojs-new-national-fraud-enforcement-division-signals-where-it-will-focus-in-inaugural-memorandum</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Department of Justice's new National Fraud Enforcement Division, highlighting its data-driven approach to targeting fraud against taxpayer dollars and advising companies in high-risk industries to proactively strengthen compliance and data analytics.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/dojs-new-national-fraud-enforcement-division-signals-where-it-will-focus-in-inaugural-memorandum</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 11:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/7b4ed9b3/727fd824.mp3" length="3663130" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>229</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Department of Justice's new National Fraud Enforcement Division, highlighting its data-driven approach to targeting fraud against taxpayer dollars and advising companies in high-risk industries to proactively strengthen compliance and data analytics.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/dojs-new-national-fraud-enforcement-division-signals-where-it-will-focus-in-inaugural-memorandum</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Delaware and New York State Courts Reject Unusual Theory Under the Securities Act</title>
      <itunes:title>Delaware and New York State Courts Reject Unusual Theory Under the Securities Act</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">aafd2e31-3888-459b-9d96-3cf1e45d8c95</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/a0c811d4</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines recent Delaware and New York court decisions dismissing Securities Act claims against mutual funds, clarifying that industry-standard, GAAP-compliant accounting practices do not constitute material misstatements or omissions under federal securities law.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/delaware-and-new-york-state-courts-reject-unusual-theory-under-the-securities-act</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines recent Delaware and New York court decisions dismissing Securities Act claims against mutual funds, clarifying that industry-standard, GAAP-compliant accounting practices do not constitute material misstatements or omissions under federal securities law.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/delaware-and-new-york-state-courts-reject-unusual-theory-under-the-securities-act</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:57:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/a0c811d4/d93feb9e.mp3" length="8297322" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>208</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines recent Delaware and New York court decisions dismissing Securities Act claims against mutual funds, clarifying that industry-standard, GAAP-compliant accounting practices do not constitute material misstatements or omissions under federal securities law.</p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/delaware-and-new-york-state-courts-reject-unusual-theory-under-the-securities-act</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tool or Intruder? What Amazon v. Perplexity Means for Agentic AI and the CFAA</title>
      <itunes:title>Tool or Intruder? What Amazon v. Perplexity Means for Agentic AI and the CFAA</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e15c307d-f3f3-4257-a842-5bd499ee4c5a</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/db5c9b13</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in <em>Amazon.com Services LLC v. Perplexity AI</em>, where the court clarified that using an AI assistant to navigate a website does not constitute unauthorized access under the CFAA, and discusses the implications for businesses, AI developers, and the future of legal and technical protections for online data. </p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/tool-or-intruder-what-amazon-v-perplexity-means-for-agentic-ai-and-the-cfaa</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in <em>Amazon.com Services LLC v. Perplexity AI</em>, where the court clarified that using an AI assistant to navigate a website does not constitute unauthorized access under the CFAA, and discusses the implications for businesses, AI developers, and the future of legal and technical protections for online data. </p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/tool-or-intruder-what-amazon-v-perplexity-means-for-agentic-ai-and-the-cfaa</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 20:35:34 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/db5c9b13/73e2fa06.mp3" length="4157158" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>260</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in <em>Amazon.com Services LLC v. Perplexity AI</em>, where the court clarified that using an AI assistant to navigate a website does not constitute unauthorized access under the CFAA, and discusses the implications for businesses, AI developers, and the future of legal and technical protections for online data. </p><p>To read the alert that this AI-generated podcast is based on, please visit: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/08/tool-or-intruder-what-amazon-v-perplexity-means-for-agentic-ai-and-the-cfaa</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Clarifies ETF Treatment of Creation Baskets During Passive Concentration Exceedances</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Clarifies ETF Treatment of Creation Baskets During Passive Concentration Exceedances</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7475dbba-f205-4c8f-9d39-3fdecafef18c</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/0d0a5673</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode outlines the SEC’s July 27, 2026 no-action letter granting regulatory relief to ETFs for passive exceedances of industry concentration limits, outlining the specific scenarios covered and the operational steps advisors must take to ensure compliance.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode outlines the SEC’s July 27, 2026 no-action letter granting regulatory relief to ETFs for passive exceedances of industry concentration limits, outlining the specific scenarios covered and the operational steps advisors must take to ensure compliance.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/0d0a5673/efdb5009.mp3" length="10850922" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>272</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode outlines the SEC’s July 27, 2026 no-action letter granting regulatory relief to ETFs for passive exceedances of industry concentration limits, outlining the specific scenarios covered and the operational steps advisors must take to ensure compliance.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Proposes Rule Changes to Make E-Delivery the Default Option</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Proposes Rule Changes to Make E-Delivery the Default Option</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">d5550249-b835-4b03-a263-e8581cae30a9</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/9b4f107e</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines the SEC’s proposed Regulation E-Delivery framework, which would allow registered investment companies and business development companies to deliver required information electronically by default, subject to specific conditions and exclusions. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines the SEC’s proposed Regulation E-Delivery framework, which would allow registered investment companies and business development companies to deliver required information electronically by default, subject to specific conditions and exclusions. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 16:58:20 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/9b4f107e/f127b87d.mp3" length="3692387" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>231</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode examines the SEC’s proposed Regulation E-Delivery framework, which would allow registered investment companies and business development companies to deliver required information electronically by default, subject to specific conditions and exclusions. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Federal District Court Allows DOJ Bulk Data Rule-Based Class Claim to Proceed: A Bellwether for Private Litigation Risk and Corporate Compliance</title>
      <itunes:title>Federal District Court Allows DOJ Bulk Data Rule-Based Class Claim to Proceed: A Bellwether for Private Litigation Risk and Corporate Compliance</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e61b709b-d06d-490c-93cd-3e9cb41d25c2</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/a6d45b65</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the first federal court decision allowing a claim based on the DOJ's Bulk Data Rule to survive a motion to dismiss, highlighting new class action risks for cross-border data transactions involving countries of concern. The discussion covers the legal implications of <em>Baker v. Index Exchange</em> and the intersection of international trade, data privacy, and ECPA litigation.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the first federal court decision allowing a claim based on the DOJ's Bulk Data Rule to survive a motion to dismiss, highlighting new class action risks for cross-border data transactions involving countries of concern. The discussion covers the legal implications of <em>Baker v. Index Exchange</em> and the intersection of international trade, data privacy, and ECPA litigation.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 10:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/a6d45b65/30131315.mp3" length="3557804" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>223</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode explores the first federal court decision allowing a claim based on the DOJ's Bulk Data Rule to survive a motion to dismiss, highlighting new class action risks for cross-border data transactions involving countries of concern. The discussion covers the legal implications of <em>Baker v. Index Exchange</em> and the intersection of international trade, data privacy, and ECPA litigation.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>In New Exemptive Order, SEC Expands Availability of Five Business Day Tender and Exchange Offers for Non-Convertible Debt Securities</title>
      <itunes:title>In New Exemptive Order, SEC Expands Availability of Five Business Day Tender and Exchange Offers for Non-Convertible Debt Securities</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7e132bc0-beb3-4c21-9e90-40ff2ccee5ac</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/f561be63</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise overview of the SEC’s new Exemptive Order, which shortens the minimum open period for tender or exchange offers for non-convertible debt securities from 20 to five business days. Key legal and procedural updates—including expanded participant eligibility, relaxed consideration standards, and streamlined mechanics—are discussed to help market participants understand the impact of these changes.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise overview of the SEC’s new Exemptive Order, which shortens the minimum open period for tender or exchange offers for non-convertible debt securities from 20 to five business days. Key legal and procedural updates—including expanded participant eligibility, relaxed consideration standards, and streamlined mechanics—are discussed to help market participants understand the impact of these changes.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/f561be63/2bdac628.mp3" length="4427159" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>277</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise overview of the SEC’s new Exemptive Order, which shortens the minimum open period for tender or exchange offers for non-convertible debt securities from 20 to five business days. Key legal and procedural updates—including expanded participant eligibility, relaxed consideration standards, and streamlined mechanics—are discussed to help market participants understand the impact of these changes.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Slims Down the Induced Infringement Cause of Action for Skinny Labels: Implications of Hikma Pharmaceuticals on Life Sciences Innovators</title>
      <itunes:title>Supreme Court Slims Down the Induced Infringement Cause of Action for Skinny Labels: Implications of Hikma Pharmaceuticals on Life Sciences Innovators</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">c8eba087-3300-4849-b28e-e500dbee5ab2</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/de63791f</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Ameren Pharma Inc.</em>, exploring its impact on skinny labels, induced patent infringement, and the regulatory landscape for generic drug manufacturers. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Ameren Pharma Inc.</em>, exploring its impact on skinny labels, induced patent infringement, and the regulatory landscape for generic drug manufacturers. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 08:59:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/de63791f/779de5fd.mp3" length="3913487" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>245</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Ameren Pharma Inc.</em>, exploring its impact on skinny labels, induced patent infringement, and the regulatory landscape for generic drug manufacturers. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Twelfth Draft Amendment to the German Merger Control Thresholds</title>
      <itunes:title>Twelfth Draft Amendment to the German Merger Control Thresholds</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">41cd6b5a-e1b5-4586-a4a7-cfb7b1b24120</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/2b912d19</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode delivers a concise overview of the draft 12th amendment to the German Act Against Restrictions of Competition, published by the German Coalition Government on June 4. The discussion covers key changes, including higher turnover thresholds for routine acquisitions, expanded applicability of the Transaction Value Threshold (TVT), and the introduction of a new preliminary review phase. Learn how these updates could impact merger notifications, transaction reviews, and referrals to the European Commission.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode delivers a concise overview of the draft 12th amendment to the German Act Against Restrictions of Competition, published by the German Coalition Government on June 4. The discussion covers key changes, including higher turnover thresholds for routine acquisitions, expanded applicability of the Transaction Value Threshold (TVT), and the introduction of a new preliminary review phase. Learn how these updates could impact merger notifications, transaction reviews, and referrals to the European Commission.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 14:23:14 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/2b912d19/5998c038.mp3" length="5502568" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>344</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode delivers a concise overview of the draft 12th amendment to the German Act Against Restrictions of Competition, published by the German Coalition Government on June 4. The discussion covers key changes, including higher turnover thresholds for routine acquisitions, expanded applicability of the Transaction Value Threshold (TVT), and the introduction of a new preliminary review phase. Learn how these updates could impact merger notifications, transaction reviews, and referrals to the European Commission.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> Supreme Court Holds No Implied Private Right of Action Under Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act</title>
      <itunes:title> Supreme Court Holds No Implied Private Right of Action Under Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">719f1b12-3fb0-4024-a668-329109f93c60</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/d4c30802</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest Supreme Court decision in F.S. Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Sabec Capital Master Fund, LTD., as we break down the 6-3 ruling’s impact on the Investment Company Act of 1940. This episode explains why the Court found Section 47B does not grant private parties the right to sue for contract rescission, how activist investors had used this provision, and what the decision means for investment management companies and business development companies. Gain insights into strengthened anti-takeover defenses, reduced litigation risk, and the reaffirmed role of the SEC as primary enforcer.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest Supreme Court decision in F.S. Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Sabec Capital Master Fund, LTD., as we break down the 6-3 ruling’s impact on the Investment Company Act of 1940. This episode explains why the Court found Section 47B does not grant private parties the right to sue for contract rescission, how activist investors had used this provision, and what the decision means for investment management companies and business development companies. Gain insights into strengthened anti-takeover defenses, reduced litigation risk, and the reaffirmed role of the SEC as primary enforcer.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 16:51:33 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/d4c30802/0baaaf19.mp3" length="3419460" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>214</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest Supreme Court decision in F.S. Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Sabec Capital Master Fund, LTD., as we break down the 6-3 ruling’s impact on the Investment Company Act of 1940. This episode explains why the Court found Section 47B does not grant private parties the right to sue for contract rescission, how activist investors had used this provision, and what the decision means for investment management companies and business development companies. Gain insights into strengthened anti-takeover defenses, reduced litigation risk, and the reaffirmed role of the SEC as primary enforcer.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Department of Defense Releases Updated 1260H List That Includes WuXi AppTec – Implications under the BIOSECURE Act </title>
      <itunes:title>Department of Defense Releases Updated 1260H List That Includes WuXi AppTec – Implications under the BIOSECURE Act </itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">cdd28276-8a0f-41ed-ad7e-aeebce46086b</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/6e04b215</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest updates to the U.S. Department of Defense 1260H list and their implications under the Biosecure Act on this episode. The hosts break down which Chinese companies were newly added, clarify distinctions between entities like Wuxi App Tech and Wuxi Biologics, and explain what these changes mean for federal contractors, grant recipients, and institutions. Learn about compliance timelines, upcoming prohibitions, key exemptions, and what steps organizations should take now to prepare.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest updates to the U.S. Department of Defense 1260H list and their implications under the Biosecure Act on this episode. The hosts break down which Chinese companies were newly added, clarify distinctions between entities like Wuxi App Tech and Wuxi Biologics, and explain what these changes mean for federal contractors, grant recipients, and institutions. Learn about compliance timelines, upcoming prohibitions, key exemptions, and what steps organizations should take now to prepare.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 09:33:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/6e04b215/fce7f1cf.mp3" length="4042219" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>253</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest updates to the U.S. Department of Defense 1260H list and their implications under the Biosecure Act on this episode. The hosts break down which Chinese companies were newly added, clarify distinctions between entities like Wuxi App Tech and Wuxi Biologics, and explain what these changes mean for federal contractors, grant recipients, and institutions. Learn about compliance timelines, upcoming prohibitions, key exemptions, and what steps organizations should take now to prepare.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IRS Announces Intent to Issue Regulations on Expanded Executive Compensation Excise Tax for Tax-Exempt Organizations</title>
      <itunes:title>IRS Announces Intent to Issue Regulations on Expanded Executive Compensation Excise Tax for Tax-Exempt Organizations</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9ec573b6-d31a-42fd-8b78-4628a645368d</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/ab22f00f</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) expands the Section 4960 excise tax on executive compensation, shifting the definition of "covered employee" from the top five earners to any employee earning over $1 million. The discussion covers key changes, including preserved and eliminated exceptions for related organization employees, and clarifies the retroactive reach of the new rules.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) expands the Section 4960 excise tax on executive compensation, shifting the definition of "covered employee" from the top five earners to any employee earning over $1 million. The discussion covers key changes, including preserved and eliminated exceptions for related organization employees, and clarifies the retroactive reach of the new rules.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 12:59:44 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/ab22f00f/8f0ae9f2.mp3" length="3551535" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>222</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode breaks down how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) expands the Section 4960 excise tax on executive compensation, shifting the definition of "covered employee" from the top five earners to any employee earning over $1 million. The discussion covers key changes, including preserved and eliminated exceptions for related organization employees, and clarifies the retroactive reach of the new rules.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>New York's Expanded Health Care Transaction Oversight Bill Fails for the Second Consecutive Year</title>
      <itunes:title>New York's Expanded Health Care Transaction Oversight Bill Fails for the Second Consecutive Year</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">33cf7744-8ba0-4158-af42-34ecf3ff7178</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/def2ba96</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise update on New York’s health care transaction oversight following the 2026–2027 state budget. Hosts discuss the exclusion of proposed amendments, how New York’s requirements compare to other states, and what health care entities and investors should watch for next. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise update on New York’s health care transaction oversight following the 2026–2027 state budget. Hosts discuss the exclusion of proposed amendments, how New York’s requirements compare to other states, and what health care entities and investors should watch for next. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 10:31:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/def2ba96/225cabaf.mp3" length="3337958" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>209</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode provides a concise update on New York’s health care transaction oversight following the 2026–2027 state budget. Hosts discuss the exclusion of proposed amendments, how New York’s requirements compare to other states, and what health care entities and investors should watch for next. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Proposes Expanded Offering Reforms for Closed-End Funds and BDCs</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Proposes Expanded Offering Reforms for Closed-End Funds and BDCs</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6db328de-8092-4be1-9109-28c453378929</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/072762a6</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we deliver a concise analysis of the SEC’s May 19, 2026 release proposing major amendments to the registered offering framework for business development companies (BDCs) and registered closed-end funds (CEFs). The discussion centers on the SEC’s push for parity between these funds and operating companies, including the elimination of public float thresholds, the introduction of new eligibility categories based on exchange listing and reporting compliance, and expanded access to short-form registration and shelf offerings. We also break down the implications for unlisted and non-traded funds, including federal preemption of state registration for certain BDCs and changes to Rule 473. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we deliver a concise analysis of the SEC’s May 19, 2026 release proposing major amendments to the registered offering framework for business development companies (BDCs) and registered closed-end funds (CEFs). The discussion centers on the SEC’s push for parity between these funds and operating companies, including the elimination of public float thresholds, the introduction of new eligibility categories based on exchange listing and reporting compliance, and expanded access to short-form registration and shelf offerings. We also break down the implications for unlisted and non-traded funds, including federal preemption of state registration for certain BDCs and changes to Rule 473. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 09:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/072762a6/a2004a84.mp3" length="3496364" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>219</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we deliver a concise analysis of the SEC’s May 19, 2026 release proposing major amendments to the registered offering framework for business development companies (BDCs) and registered closed-end funds (CEFs). The discussion centers on the SEC’s push for parity between these funds and operating companies, including the elimination of public float thresholds, the introduction of new eligibility categories based on exchange listing and reporting compliance, and expanded access to short-form registration and shelf offerings. We also break down the implications for unlisted and non-traded funds, including federal preemption of state registration for certain BDCs and changes to Rule 473. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Proposes Major Overhaul of Public Company Reporting Framework: Two-Tier Filer Status System, Expanded Disclosure Accommodations, and New Relief for the Smallest Filers</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Proposes Major Overhaul of Public Company Reporting Framework: Two-Tier Filer Status System, Expanded Disclosure Accommodations, and New Relief for the Smallest Filers</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">80e667f1-86a5-44d2-ac5e-17186e499cfd</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/6f4d1b93</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the SEC’s May 19, 2026 proposed amendments to the public company reporting framework. The discussion covers the most sweeping simplification of filer status in over twenty years, including the elimination of intermediate filer categories and a sharp increase in the large accelerated filer (LAF) threshold from $700 million to $2 billion. We explain how these changes will shift nearly 80% of public companies to non-accelerated filer (NAF) status, resulting in significant compliance cost reductions and streamlined reporting requirements.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the SEC’s May 19, 2026 proposed amendments to the public company reporting framework. The discussion covers the most sweeping simplification of filer status in over twenty years, including the elimination of intermediate filer categories and a sharp increase in the large accelerated filer (LAF) threshold from $700 million to $2 billion. We explain how these changes will shift nearly 80% of public companies to non-accelerated filer (NAF) status, resulting in significant compliance cost reductions and streamlined reporting requirements.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 13:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/6f4d1b93/26a32f74.mp3" length="4335208" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>271</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the SEC’s May 19, 2026 proposed amendments to the public company reporting framework. The discussion covers the most sweeping simplification of filer status in over twenty years, including the elimination of intermediate filer categories and a sharp increase in the large accelerated filer (LAF) threshold from $700 million to $2 billion. We explain how these changes will shift nearly 80% of public companies to non-accelerated filer (NAF) status, resulting in significant compliance cost reductions and streamlined reporting requirements.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>China’s NMPA Issues Final Measures on Regulatory Data Protection</title>
      <itunes:title>China’s NMPA Issues Final Measures on Regulatory Data Protection</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7dea0454-d4bb-46b4-94ab-dd1d0dfee94b</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/e7d98084</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode offers a concise breakdown of China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) and its newly issued implementation measures for drug trial data protection, effective May 15, 2026. The hosts explain which types of data are eligible for protection, detail the NMPA’s tiered system—ranging from six years for innovative drugs to zero for follow-on generics—and clarify the procedural requirements for securing these rights. They also discuss the critical operational impacts for life sciences companies, including the need for early strategic planning and the implications of strict filing windows.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode offers a concise breakdown of China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) and its newly issued implementation measures for drug trial data protection, effective May 15, 2026. The hosts explain which types of data are eligible for protection, detail the NMPA’s tiered system—ranging from six years for innovative drugs to zero for follow-on generics—and clarify the procedural requirements for securing these rights. They also discuss the critical operational impacts for life sciences companies, including the need for early strategic planning and the implications of strict filing windows.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/e7d98084/f8006776.mp3" length="3939819" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>247</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>This episode offers a concise breakdown of China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) and its newly issued implementation measures for drug trial data protection, effective May 15, 2026. The hosts explain which types of data are eligible for protection, detail the NMPA’s tiered system—ranging from six years for innovative drugs to zero for follow-on generics—and clarify the procedural requirements for securing these rights. They also discuss the critical operational impacts for life sciences companies, including the need for early strategic planning and the implications of strict filing windows.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Colorado Scales Back AI Law, with Targeted Implications for Health Care</title>
      <itunes:title>Colorado Scales Back AI Law, with Targeted Implications for Health Care</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">fdb7dd92-fadf-45ec-bac0-9db53a91d641</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/c6e55fff</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we provide a concise overview of Colorado’s newly enacted AI Act, SB 26189, which was signed into law on May 14, 2026, and replaces the previous 2024 legislation. The discussion covers the law’s delayed effective date of January 1, 2027, and highlights key changes, including the removal of the duty of care to avoid algorithmic discrimination and mandatory impact assessments. We break down the new documentation and record retention requirements for AI developers and deployers, consumer rights such as the ability to request correction instructions and human review, and the exclusive enforcement authority of the Colorado Attorney General. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we provide a concise overview of Colorado’s newly enacted AI Act, SB 26189, which was signed into law on May 14, 2026, and replaces the previous 2024 legislation. The discussion covers the law’s delayed effective date of January 1, 2027, and highlights key changes, including the removal of the duty of care to avoid algorithmic discrimination and mandatory impact assessments. We break down the new documentation and record retention requirements for AI developers and deployers, consumer rights such as the ability to request correction instructions and human review, and the exclusive enforcement authority of the Colorado Attorney General. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/c6e55fff/8529b996.mp3" length="3605451" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>226</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we provide a concise overview of Colorado’s newly enacted AI Act, SB 26189, which was signed into law on May 14, 2026, and replaces the previous 2024 legislation. The discussion covers the law’s delayed effective date of January 1, 2027, and highlights key changes, including the removal of the duty of care to avoid algorithmic discrimination and mandatory impact assessments. We break down the new documentation and record retention requirements for AI developers and deployers, consumer rights such as the ability to request correction instructions and human review, and the exclusive enforcement authority of the Colorado Attorney General. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S. House Select Committee Releases Report on NASA’s Research Security and Enforcement of the Wolf Amendment</title>
      <itunes:title>U.S. House Select Committee Releases Report on NASA’s Research Security and Enforcement of the Wolf Amendment</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">06a8893a-88c8-441a-b20f-3900bc946e7f</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/3cd87a14</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 14, 2026 U.S. House Select Committee report on NASA’s enforcement of the Wolf Amendment, which prohibits NASA-funded collaborations with Chinese entities. We discuss how the committee’s broad interpretation of “collaboration”—including simple co-authorship with PRC-affiliated researchers—led to flagged compliance issues, and highlight significant analytical gaps in the report’s methodology.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 14, 2026 U.S. House Select Committee report on NASA’s enforcement of the Wolf Amendment, which prohibits NASA-funded collaborations with Chinese entities. We discuss how the committee’s broad interpretation of “collaboration”—including simple co-authorship with PRC-affiliated researchers—led to flagged compliance issues, and highlight significant analytical gaps in the report’s methodology.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/3cd87a14/54fe8ede.mp3" length="3838255" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>240</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 14, 2026 U.S. House Select Committee report on NASA’s enforcement of the Wolf Amendment, which prohibits NASA-funded collaborations with Chinese entities. We discuss how the committee’s broad interpretation of “collaboration”—including simple co-authorship with PRC-affiliated researchers—led to flagged compliance issues, and highlight significant analytical gaps in the report’s methodology.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CMS Announces Nationwide Moratoria on Hospice and Home Health Agency Medicare Enrollments – Key FAQs for Hospice Providers and Home Health Agencies</title>
      <itunes:title>CMS Announces Nationwide Moratoria on Hospice and Home Health Agency Medicare Enrollments – Key FAQs for Hospice Providers and Home Health Agencies</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">63ad10df-c63b-4256-96f7-6ddb3f44d1d4</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/647d48af</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 13, 2026 announcement from the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (CMS) imposing a nationwide six-month moratorium on new Medicare enrollments for hospices and home health agencies. Our hosts discuss the reasons behind this sweeping action—including concerns over rapid enrollment growth, improper ownership transfers, and rising fraud—and its significant impact on healthcare investors and transactions. We cover which deals are halted, the critical role of the 36-month rule, what exemptions exist, and how state Medicaid programs may follow suit.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 13, 2026 announcement from the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (CMS) imposing a nationwide six-month moratorium on new Medicare enrollments for hospices and home health agencies. Our hosts discuss the reasons behind this sweeping action—including concerns over rapid enrollment growth, improper ownership transfers, and rising fraud—and its significant impact on healthcare investors and transactions. We cover which deals are halted, the critical role of the 36-month rule, what exemptions exist, and how state Medicaid programs may follow suit.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 12:31:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/647d48af/45ff7b1a.mp3" length="4242421" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>266</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the May 13, 2026 announcement from the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (CMS) imposing a nationwide six-month moratorium on new Medicare enrollments for hospices and home health agencies. Our hosts discuss the reasons behind this sweeping action—including concerns over rapid enrollment growth, improper ownership transfers, and rising fraud—and its significant impact on healthcare investors and transactions. We cover which deals are halted, the critical role of the 36-month rule, what exemptions exist, and how state Medicaid programs may follow suit.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CMS and FDA Propose Major Changes for Breakthrough Devices with Proposed Repeal of NTAP “Alternative Pathway” and New “RAPID” Coverage Pathway</title>
      <itunes:title>CMS and FDA Propose Major Changes for Breakthrough Devices with Proposed Repeal of NTAP “Alternative Pathway” and New “RAPID” Coverage Pathway</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6d47132b-3c0a-4fb6-8b8b-91608680845d</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/d7f132f9</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest proposals from CMS and the FDA that could reshape Medicare coverage and payment for breakthrough medical devices. This episode breaks down the April 2026 CMS proposal to repeal the alternative pathway for new technology add-on payments (NTAP), examining how stricter evidentiary standards may impact device adoption and the economic value of breakthrough designations. The discussion also covers the new Rapid Coverage Pathway, which aims to accelerate national coverage for certain devices, and reviews the pending Ensuring Patient Access to Critical Breakthrough Products Act of 2025.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest proposals from CMS and the FDA that could reshape Medicare coverage and payment for breakthrough medical devices. This episode breaks down the April 2026 CMS proposal to repeal the alternative pathway for new technology add-on payments (NTAP), examining how stricter evidentiary standards may impact device adoption and the economic value of breakthrough designations. The discussion also covers the new Rapid Coverage Pathway, which aims to accelerate national coverage for certain devices, and reviews the pending Ensuring Patient Access to Critical Breakthrough Products Act of 2025.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 12:25:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/d7f132f9/67d3245f.mp3" length="3587897" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>225</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>Explore the latest proposals from CMS and the FDA that could reshape Medicare coverage and payment for breakthrough medical devices. This episode breaks down the April 2026 CMS proposal to repeal the alternative pathway for new technology add-on payments (NTAP), examining how stricter evidentiary standards may impact device adoption and the economic value of breakthrough designations. The discussion also covers the new Rapid Coverage Pathway, which aims to accelerate national coverage for certain devices, and reviews the pending Ensuring Patient Access to Critical Breakthrough Products Act of 2025.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Proposes Optional Semiannual Reporting for Public Companies: A Potential Sea Change in Periodic Disclosure</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Proposes Optional Semiannual Reporting for Public Companies: A Potential Sea Change in Periodic Disclosure</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">b670be36-596c-4051-a3a6-f31ec7643d81</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/fffd1c78</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just proposed letting public companies file semiannually instead of quarterly—but will anyone actually make the switch? Discover how the new Form 10-S could reshape compliance costs, long-term business strategy, and the path to going public. Learn why insider trading policies, market pressure, and potential legal liability under Section 18 may keep most companies filing every quarter despite the option to stop.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just proposed letting public companies file semiannually instead of quarterly—but will anyone actually make the switch? Discover how the new Form 10-S could reshape compliance costs, long-term business strategy, and the path to going public. Learn why insider trading policies, market pressure, and potential legal liability under Section 18 may keep most companies filing every quarter despite the option to stop.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 09:23:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/fffd1c78/8106f26c.mp3" length="5561083" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>348</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just proposed letting public companies file semiannually instead of quarterly—but will anyone actually make the switch? Discover how the new Form 10-S could reshape compliance costs, long-term business strategy, and the path to going public. Learn why insider trading policies, market pressure, and potential legal liability under Section 18 may keep most companies filing every quarter despite the option to stop.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Reinforces Donor Privacy Protections, Permitting Immediate Federal Court Challenge to State Subpoenas</title>
      <itunes:title>Supreme Court Reinforces Donor Privacy Protections, Permitting Immediate Federal Court Challenge to State Subpoenas</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">21e8ec20-18e6-4135-bc69-31890ff973f7</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/ad51d30b</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport</em>—a landmark ruling reinforcing donor privacy protections under the First Amendment. Learn how the Court held that a government subpoena creates an immediate constitutional injury, giving nonprofits, universities, and advocacy organizations the right to challenge disclosure demands in federal court without waiting for enforcement. Discover key takeaways for safeguarding sensitive member data. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport</em>—a landmark ruling reinforcing donor privacy protections under the First Amendment. Learn how the Court held that a government subpoena creates an immediate constitutional injury, giving nonprofits, universities, and advocacy organizations the right to challenge disclosure demands in federal court without waiting for enforcement. Discover key takeaways for safeguarding sensitive member data. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/ad51d30b/f9a5f4af.mp3" length="4478150" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>280</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we break down the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in <em>First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport</em>—a landmark ruling reinforcing donor privacy protections under the First Amendment. Learn how the Court held that a government subpoena creates an immediate constitutional injury, giving nonprofits, universities, and advocacy organizations the right to challenge disclosure demands in federal court without waiting for enforcement. Discover key takeaways for safeguarding sensitive member data. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The European Data Protection Board Releases New Guidelines on the Processing of Personal Data for Scientific Research</title>
      <itunes:title>The European Data Protection Board Releases New Guidelines on the Processing of Personal Data for Scientific Research</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2c54f9cf-db23-4acc-8c5e-c0010ce4abe3</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/5eb5ee58</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>The European Data Protection Board’s new guidelines, adopted April 15, 2026, aim to replace Europe’s fragmented patchwork of national data-handling rules with a unified compliance framework for scientific research. In this episode, discover how the strict six-factor test defines legitimate research, why commercial motivation doesn’t disqualify you, how broad consent and data-erasure exceptions work in practice, and what the UK’s sharp regulatory divergence means for multinational clinical trials. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>The European Data Protection Board’s new guidelines, adopted April 15, 2026, aim to replace Europe’s fragmented patchwork of national data-handling rules with a unified compliance framework for scientific research. In this episode, discover how the strict six-factor test defines legitimate research, why commercial motivation doesn’t disqualify you, how broad consent and data-erasure exceptions work in practice, and what the UK’s sharp regulatory divergence means for multinational clinical trials. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 09:23:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/5eb5ee58/7f2ea806.mp3" length="4941667" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>309</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>The European Data Protection Board’s new guidelines, adopted April 15, 2026, aim to replace Europe’s fragmented patchwork of national data-handling rules with a unified compliance framework for scientific research. In this episode, discover how the strict six-factor test defines legitimate research, why commercial motivation doesn’t disqualify you, how broad consent and data-erasure exceptions work in practice, and what the UK’s sharp regulatory divergence means for multinational clinical trials. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>New Nasdaq Rule Appears Intended to Bring SPACs Back to the Nasdaq Capital Market</title>
      <itunes:title>New Nasdaq Rule Appears Intended to Bring SPACs Back to the Nasdaq Capital Market</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">3bc5f463-2218-4671-96ed-4c2551081d6a</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/6aa5bfd0</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack the SEC’s April 2026 approval of sweeping Nasdaq rule amendments that reshape how SPACs list on U.S. exchanges. Discover why an accounting shift on warrants forced SPACs off the capital market, how new $100 million and $75 million thresholds raise the bar for listing, and what stricter shareholder requirements mean for the future of smaller SPACs. Essential listening for anyone structuring or investing in SPACs today.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack the SEC’s April 2026 approval of sweeping Nasdaq rule amendments that reshape how SPACs list on U.S. exchanges. Discover why an accounting shift on warrants forced SPACs off the capital market, how new $100 million and $75 million thresholds raise the bar for listing, and what stricter shareholder requirements mean for the future of smaller SPACs. Essential listening for anyone structuring or investing in SPACs today.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/6aa5bfd0/669949a7.mp3" length="4708446" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>295</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack the SEC’s April 2026 approval of sweeping Nasdaq rule amendments that reshape how SPACs list on U.S. exchanges. Discover why an accounting shift on warrants forced SPACs off the capital market, how new $100 million and $75 million thresholds raise the bar for listing, and what stricter shareholder requirements mean for the future of smaller SPACs. Essential listening for anyone structuring or investing in SPACs today.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bridging Chemistry and Biology: EU Court Clarifies Generic Pathways for Synthetic Peptides Referencing Originator Biological Medicines?</title>
      <itunes:title>Bridging Chemistry and Biology: EU Court Clarifies Generic Pathways for Synthetic Peptides Referencing Originator Biological Medicines?</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">95a768f6-dda6-4547-a814-80b0278d4f0a</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/e15ac7e2</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack a landmark 2026 EU Court of Justice ruling on whether chemically synthesized peptides can be approved as generics of biological medicines. Discover how the court balanced manufacturing differences against bioequivalence standards, clarified national courts’ power to review drug approvals, and explored the safety safeguards protecting patients—all while rapid advances in peptide synthesis continue to blur the line between chemistry and biology.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack a landmark 2026 EU Court of Justice ruling on whether chemically synthesized peptides can be approved as generics of biological medicines. Discover how the court balanced manufacturing differences against bioequivalence standards, clarified national courts’ power to review drug approvals, and explored the safety safeguards protecting patients—all while rapid advances in peptide synthesis continue to blur the line between chemistry and biology.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/e15ac7e2/e046e015.mp3" length="3769291" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>236</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>In this episode, we unpack a landmark 2026 EU Court of Justice ruling on whether chemically synthesized peptides can be approved as generics of biological medicines. Discover how the court balanced manufacturing differences against bioequivalence standards, clarified national courts’ power to review drug approvals, and explored the safety safeguards protecting patients—all while rapid advances in peptide synthesis continue to blur the line between chemistry and biology.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Inadvertent Fiduciaries? DOL Guidance Creates New ERISA Risks for Proxy Advisory Arrangements</title>
      <itunes:title>Inadvertent Fiduciaries? DOL Guidance Creates New ERISA Risks for Proxy Advisory Arrangements</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">ab0c3cc5-914a-4cda-89c5-492e30bb0453</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/088eef0e</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>The Department of Labor’s Technical Release 2026-01 is reshaping ERISA compliance — and proxy advisory firms may not even realize they’re in the crosshairs. In this episode, discover how the government is redefining fiduciary status, why contractual disclaimers no longer shield asset managers, and what the new strict pecuniary-only standard means for ESG-related voting decisions. Learn about heightened co-fiduciary liability risks and the critical compliance steps every plan fiduciary should take now.</p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>The Department of Labor’s Technical Release 2026-01 is reshaping ERISA compliance — and proxy advisory firms may not even realize they’re in the crosshairs. In this episode, discover how the government is redefining fiduciary status, why contractual disclaimers no longer shield asset managers, and what the new strict pecuniary-only standard means for ESG-related voting decisions. Learn about heightened co-fiduciary liability risks and the critical compliance steps every plan fiduciary should take now.</p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/088eef0e/2cf077a8.mp3" length="3884230" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>243</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>The Department of Labor’s Technical Release 2026-01 is reshaping ERISA compliance — and proxy advisory firms may not even realize they’re in the crosshairs. In this episode, discover how the government is redefining fiduciary status, why contractual disclaimers no longer shield asset managers, and what the new strict pecuniary-only standard means for ESG-related voting decisions. Learn about heightened co-fiduciary liability risks and the critical compliance steps every plan fiduciary should take now.</p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Are You Ready for the Entry into Force of the UK’s New Clinical Trials Regime?</title>
      <itunes:title>Are You Ready for the Entry into Force of the UK’s New Clinical Trials Regime?</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">25e1dfe2-e2b9-426c-92f4-d7dc8b554515</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/c19af7fe</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>The UK’s clinical trials regime is getting its biggest overhaul in over two decades. In this episode, discover how the Medicines for Human Use Clinical Trials Amendment Regulations 2025 streamline trial approvals with a single combined application, introduce a 30-day decision mandate, and create a fast-track “silent green light” for low-risk trials. Learn about new transparency requirements, safety reporting changes, and what sponsors must do now to prepare for the April 2026 entry into force. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>The UK’s clinical trials regime is getting its biggest overhaul in over two decades. In this episode, discover how the Medicines for Human Use Clinical Trials Amendment Regulations 2025 streamline trial approvals with a single combined application, introduce a 30-day decision mandate, and create a fast-track “silent green light” for low-risk trials. Learn about new transparency requirements, safety reporting changes, and what sponsors must do now to prepare for the April 2026 entry into force. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 09:23:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/c19af7fe/275eb834.mp3" length="4702594" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>294</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>The UK’s clinical trials regime is getting its biggest overhaul in over two decades. In this episode, discover how the Medicines for Human Use Clinical Trials Amendment Regulations 2025 streamline trial approvals with a single combined application, introduce a 30-day decision mandate, and create a fast-track “silent green light” for low-risk trials. Learn about new transparency requirements, safety reporting changes, and what sponsors must do now to prepare for the April 2026 entry into force. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Navigating the Section 101 Landscape: REGENXBIO v. Sarepta and Its Implications for Patent Eligibility</title>
      <itunes:title>Navigating the Section 101 Landscape: REGENXBIO v. Sarepta and Its Implications for Patent Eligibility</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2065dacd-9ec9-4d6c-b579-1e9b099c6eb5</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/4d982961</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>Dive into the February 2026 Federal Circuit decision in <em>REGENXBIO v. Sarepta</em> and what it means for patent eligibility in the life sciences. This episode unpacks the <em>Alice/Mayo</em> framework, explores how the court distinguished genetically engineered cells from natural phenomena, and examines the ongoing debate—including the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA)—over whether innovation will be shaped by legislation or unpredictable case-by-case adjudication. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>Dive into the February 2026 Federal Circuit decision in <em>REGENXBIO v. Sarepta</em> and what it means for patent eligibility in the life sciences. This episode unpacks the <em>Alice/Mayo</em> framework, explores how the court distinguished genetically engineered cells from natural phenomena, and examines the ongoing debate—including the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA)—over whether innovation will be shaped by legislation or unpredictable case-by-case adjudication. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/4d982961/2b596078.mp3" length="4602284" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>288</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>Dive into the February 2026 Federal Circuit decision in <em>REGENXBIO v. Sarepta</em> and what it means for patent eligibility in the life sciences. This episode unpacks the <em>Alice/Mayo</em> framework, explores how the court distinguished genetically engineered cells from natural phenomena, and examines the ongoing debate—including the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA)—over whether innovation will be shaped by legislation or unpredictable case-by-case adjudication. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SEC Cuts Minimum Tender Offer Period in Half for Equity Securities</title>
      <itunes:title>SEC Cuts Minimum Tender Offer Period in Half for Equity Securities</itunes:title>
      <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">25037ba1-d8f6-4714-b5d2-8a1a646a13fe</guid>
      <link>https://share.transistor.fm/s/6c38531d</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just cut the minimum tender offer period for equity securities from 20 business days to 10. In this episode, discover what drove this landmark April 2026 exemptive order, how it applies differently to reporting and non-reporting companies, and the strict cash-only, fixed-price conditions and communication deadlines you need to know. Learn how competing offers can reset the clock—and why compliance remains non-negotiable. </p>]]>
      </description>
      <content:encoded>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just cut the minimum tender offer period for equity securities from 20 business days to 10. In this episode, discover what drove this landmark April 2026 exemptive order, how it applies differently to reporting and non-reporting companies, and the strict cash-only, fixed-price conditions and communication deadlines you need to know. Learn how competing offers can reset the clock—and why compliance remains non-negotiable. </p>]]>
      </content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</author>
      <enclosure url="https://media.transistor.fm/6c38531d/e2b57b20.mp3" length="3857899" type="audio/mpeg"/>
      <itunes:author>Ropes &amp; Gray LLP</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>242</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:summary>
        <![CDATA[<p>The SEC just cut the minimum tender offer period for equity securities from 20 business days to 10. In this episode, discover what drove this landmark April 2026 exemptive order, how it applies differently to reporting and non-reporting companies, and the strict cash-only, fixed-price conditions and communication deadlines you need to know. Learn how competing offers can reset the clock—and why compliance remains non-negotiable. </p>]]>
      </itunes:summary>
      <itunes:keywords>Business News, Legal</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:explicit>No</itunes:explicit>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
