Legal News. Expert Insight

Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems

D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb Sues Kenneth Brewer Sr. for Diverting $1.25M in Nonprofit Funds.

Kenneth Brewer Sr., former executive director of a nonprofit focused on revitalizing the H Street corridor, is being sued by D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb over allegations he misappropriated more than $1.25 million in charitable funds for personal gain.

The lawsuit claims Mr. Brewer quietly approved large bonuses for himself by bypassing the nonprofit’s board and internal review process, instead routing the payments through a for-profit subsidiary under his control.

“Brewer violated that legal duty, diverting $1.25 million intended to support the H Street small business community to pay himself lucrative bonuses,” Mr. Schwalb said.

“As the District’s independent Attorney General, I will always use the law to hold bad actors accountable, and will now work to recover these illegally diverted funds, and ensure that they are used for their intended purpose of fostering economic opportunity and affordable housing on and around H Street.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb (@dcattorneygeneral)

Secret Bonuses Through a For-Profit Subsidiary

Kenneth Brewer Sr. served as executive director of both the H Street Community Development Corporation (HSCDC) and its for-profit arm, H Street Investment Corporation (HSIC), from 2010 until his retirement in June 2023.

Between 2017 and 2022, he allegedly avoided the nonprofit’s standard bonus approval process, which required external legal review and board consent. Instead, he submitted bonus requests to HSIC’s board, which authorized five payments ranging from $150,000 to $350,000, without notifying HSCDC’s board.

When the nonprofit finally discovered the 2022 bonus in April 2023, it moved to rescind the payment. Brewer, however, did not return the money and retired just two months later.

Misuse of Property Sale Funds

According to the complaint, Brewer also directed proceeds from the sale of HSCDC-owned properties into HSIC’s accounts, then used those funds to pay his bonuses. Under D.C. law, charitable assets cannot be redirected from their mission without court approval.

OAG alleges these actions violated nonprofit regulations and left HSCDC in a financially precarious position, undermining its core mission of supporting affordable housing and small business development.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty

As a nonprofit leader, Kenneth Brewer was legally obligated to act in good faith and in the best interest of HSCDC and the communities it serves. By keeping the board in the dark and diverting funds for personal enrichment, OAG says he broke that trust and the law.

Broader Nonprofit Enforcement Push

This lawsuit is part of Attorney General Schwalb’s broader efforts to hold nonprofit leaders accountable. His office has recently taken similar action against:

A police oversight nonprofit director;
A PTA treasurer;
A fraternal organization accused of illegal liquor sales;
And others who misused nonprofit funds for personal gain.

Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb’s team also helped restructure the sale of the Providence Hospital campus to preserve $5 million for local healthcare.

Under the District’s Nonprofit Corporation Act, nonprofit officers must use organizational funds strictly for their stated mission. Violating that duty can lead to civil penalties and demands for restitution.

Ziploc Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Hidden Microplastics.

A California woman is suing household giant S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., the maker of Ziploc® bags, alleging the company is misleading consumers about the safety and sustainability of its products.

The lawsuit, filed April 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accuses S.C. Johnson of failing to disclose the presence of microplastics in several Ziploc products.

“People buy Ziploc bags believing they’re safe for everyday use and even environmentally responsible,” the complaint states.

“What they don’t know is that under typical conditions, these bags may shed microplastics.”

What Are Microplastics and Why Should You Care?

Microplastics are tiny plastic particles, often invisible, that result from the breakdown of larger plastic products. They’re now being detected in oceans, tap water, and even human blood.

Health experts warn that microplastics can disrupt hormones, damage cells, and may pose long-term risks we’re only beginning to understand.

The lawsuit claims Ziploc bags, marketed as “microwave safe” and suitable for freezer storage, are made with polyethylene and polypropylene, materials that may release microplastics when exposed to extreme temperatures.

“S.C. Johnson knows these bags aren’t as safe or as green as they claim,” the plaintiff argues. “They just don’t want consumers to know it.”

Green Marketing or Greenwashing?

The suit points to what it calls "greenwashing" - a marketing tactic where companies use buzzwords like sustainable, eco-conscious, or safe to appeal to environmentally minded shoppers, while hiding information that may contradict those claims.

S.C. Johnson, a privately held firm with brands like Windex, Glade, and Pledge under its belt, has been vocal in recent years about its commitment to sustainability.

In late 2023, the company even announced a global initiative to redesign products for plastic circularity, encouraging reuse and recyclability.

But the complaint paints a different picture.

“You can’t claim to be part of the solution while selling products that are part of the problem,” the plaintiff’s statement reads.

The case was filed by Linda Cheslow, a California consumer who says she purchased Ziploc products believing they were safer and more environmentally friendly than they actually are.

The law firm representing her hasn’t been publicly named yet, though legal analysts expect more class members to join if the court approves class certification.

If Cheslow wins or even if the case makes it through discovery, it could set a powerful legal precedent for how companies label, market, and disclose what’s in their products.

It could also open the door to more lawsuits targeting companies that capitalize on consumer trust while ignoring growing concerns around microplastics and chemical safety.

What Consumers Can Do

If you’re concerned about microplastics in everyday products:

Avoid heating or freezing plastic containers, even if labeled safe
Look for third-party certifications on sustainability claims
Switch to reusable glass, silicone, or metal containers for food storage
Watch for class action updates from the Northern District of California

As of today, S.C. Johnson has not issued a public response to the lawsuit.

“Microwave safe” may not mean microplastic-free.

S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. is a privately held, family-owned American company based in Racine, Wisconsin. Founded in 1886 by Samuel Curtis Johnson, the company has remained under the leadership of the Johnson family for five generations. Today, it’s one of the most recognizable names in household products, with a presence in over 110 countries and an estimated annual revenue exceeding $10 billion.

The company is best known for producing trusted consumer brands such as Windex, Glade, Pledge, OFF!, Raid, and, notably, Ziploc®—a product line of storage bags and containers that has become a household staple. S.C. Johnson acquired Ziploc® from Dow Chemical in 1997, expanding its footprint into food storage and consumer packaging.

In recent years, S.C. Johnson has made high-profile commitments to environmental sustainability, launching initiatives to reduce plastic waste, use more recyclable materials, and promote ingredient transparency.

It has often positioned itself as an industry leader in corporate responsibility, especially around plastic pollution and ocean conservation.

Kirkland & Ellis Adds Andrew J. Gershon and Semhar M. Woldai to Investment Funds Group.

Kirkland strengthens its market-leading secondaries team with two high-profile hires amid rising demand.

Kirkland & Ellis has announced that Andrew J. Gershon and Semhar M. Woldai will join the firm as partners in its liquidity solutions practice, part of the Investment Funds Group.

“Andrew is a leader in the secondaries space, and Semhar is a talented rising star. We’re excited to have them on our leading secondaries team.” said Jon A. Ballis, Chairman of Kirkland’s Executive Committee.

Mr. Gershon, who joins from Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, brings extensive experience advising both investors and sponsors. His practice spans a broad range of secondary transactions, including fund recapitalizations, GP-led restructurings, secondary direct deals, and traditional fund interest acquisitions and dispositions.

"Kirkland is the market leader for investment funds work, with the largest volume of secondaries transactions of any law firm in the world. I’m thrilled to join the premier platform in the secondaries market and to contribute to its continued growth and success.” Andrew Gershon said.

Ms. Woldai, formerly counsel at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, focuses on fund formation and secondary transactions such as continuation funds. She also advises institutional investors on private fund investments.

“Kirkland presented an exciting opportunity to join an unmatched platform and a team of really exceptional lawyers who value collaboration, developing talent and a team-first approach.

I look forward to joining my new colleagues and contributing to the continued momentum and success of Kirkland’s secondaries team.” said Semhar Woldai.

Sean Hill, a senior partner in the Investment Funds Group, welcomed the additions.

“Andrew and Semhar are top performers. They will be a seamless addition to our leading team in the secondaries space.” Mr. Hill said.

The announcement follows the recent hire of Thibaut Partsch, who joined Kirkland’s London office on May 6. Partsch will help lead coordination between the firm and independent Luxembourg-based law firms, streamlining cross-border regulatory and legal efforts.

Kirkland & Ellis is a leading global law firm known for its excellence in M&A, corporate law, litigation, intellectual property, and private equity. With offices in key financial centers worldwide, the firm advises clients across a broad range of industries. Recognized for its work on high-stakes transactions and disputes, Kirkland delivers innovative legal strategies backed by deep industry knowledge. Its focus on complex deals and cutting-edge solutions positions it as a trusted advisor in the global legal market.

In the high-pressure world of law, leadership often requires more than just sharp legal skills. It demands clear communication, resilience, and the ability to guide teams through complex challenges. Few understand this better than Trinnie Houghton, a Boston-based executive coach who has spent nearly 15 years helping senior attorneys, partners, and emerging leaders transform how they lead — and how they sustain themselves in demanding roles.

With a background as an attorney at top Boston firms and deep expertise in leadership development, Trinnie brings a unique blend of analytical thinking and human insight to her coaching. She has worked with clients across industries and continents, helping them navigate everything from team dynamics and enterprise strategy to mental health and career growth.

In this interview, Trinnie shares her insights into the unique leadership challenges facing lawyers today — and how coaching can help legal professionals at every level thrive in their careers while maintaining well-being and authenticity.

You’ve worked with professionals across industries — what’s unique about coaching lawyers and legal leaders?

I believe coaching leaders share many common threads across industries — after all, we’re all human. But what makes coaching attorneys unique is how they’ve been trained and the specific demands of their profession. A coach working with legal leaders needs to understand their context — from how they think and communicate to the values that guide their practice.

It’s been a privilege to coach attorneys. In my experience, many legal leaders tend to have a strong sense of duty — they care deeply about doing the right thing and protecting both their clients and their organizations.

One thing that stands out is how much attorneys appreciate well-crafted questions. They seem to enjoy thinking through prompts from multiple angles. When appropriate, I also bring in relevant resources or frameworks — they tend to value that kind of rigor and specificity.

What dynamics or challenges stand out in the legal space compared to other sectors?

A common challenge I’ve observed is the shift from a lawyer mindset to a leadership mindset. Lawyers are trained to protect, defend, and reduce risk — which serves them well in their practice. But that same mindset can sometimes bleed into how they manage people or influence organizational dynamics. The most successful corporate attorneys I’ve worked with understand this. They know their role goes beyond legal counsel — it’s about taking an enterprise-wide view and leading people effectively. They’ve learned to flex between legal expertise and leadership presence, navigating both their teams and the broader political landscape of their organizations.

Another dynamic I’ve noticed is that advancement opportunities in legal departments can be limited, depending on how the team is structured. That can create frustration for talented individuals looking to grow — and it’s often a coaching opportunity to explore influence, visibility, and long-term career strategy.

How do you approach mental health and well-being in your coaching work, particularly with high-performing legal professionals?

This is near and dear to my heart and not just limited to coaching attorneys. In most high-performing professions, the pressures of the job take a deep toll on well-being – not just mental, but physical, emotional as well. My experience has been to understand first whether the client leader understands how well-being fits into being better able to perform their job well, and what steps have already been taken. If they haven’t been taken, we talk about the cost of not doing anything. We talk about trade-offs at work. We talk about being intentional about what that would look like and what might result. We also talk about small steps, and what permission from themselves that needs to be given.

What are some strategies you’ve found effective for helping them manage pressure and stress?

(1) Being intentional. For example, planning vacations well in advance, blocking them on the calendar, or planning no-work weekends. (2) Getting outside. Walking in nature, whether it be a forest path or botanical garden. A corollary is having plants in your office or home. Research is replete with evidence on how being outdoors, or near trees or even pictures of them, can settle the nervous system. (3) Movement. This does not require a heart-pounding exercise routine, unless that is enjoyed, too. Walking and yoga are also helpful. (4) Seeing friends and building community. Spending time being with people that support you and make you laugh. Doing something you love outside of work with others also helps clear the mind and put things into perspective. There is much evidence on how rest, taking time away, or having fun doing something enjoyable makes us more productive when we return to work.

Ariel Group emphasizes leadership presence and authentic communication — how do those skills show up in the legal profession?

Attorneys are well-spoken and clear writers. Word choice is very intentional, and they excel here. My experience has been that leadership presence shows up best when they are aware of the whole enterprise. This means acknowledging other perspectives and building those relationships to do good work together.

Where do lawyers and firm leaders often struggle or thrive in this area?

My experience has seen lawyers struggle when other perspectives cannot be acknowledged and they seem stuck in a position, unwilling to budge. Or when genuine relationships are not built cross-functionally. Attorneys tend to thrive using their good communication skills. Very skilled attorney leaders leverage their communication through nuancing it to better understand, build rapport and contribute as a thought leader. At times, they learn to adopt a more informal tone when the situation calls for it.

You coach everyone from new managers to the C-suite. How does your approach shift depending on where someone is in their legal career?

Newer managers tend to focus on building their teams, developing peer relationships for leadership cross-functionally, delegating, and working through their teams. They are learning to put more emphasis on strategic thinking and influencing through others. More senior level partners/General Counsel positions are more focused on the business’s overall success and leveraging an enterprise mindset. They have developed relationships with peers, understanding the ways in which the business works together and where legal fits into a successful pathway forward. They also have a clear vision for their department, ensuring their team is working as a high-performing team. They attend to their direct reports’ development, and succession planning. They are constantly thinking strategically and using their connections to get things done.

Do you find certain leadership skills are more critical at the partner level?

My experience has been relationship building is key at the partnership or C-Suite level, as is the ability to think strategically and knowing how to lead through others. There can also be an emphasis on leadership in their community to build business relationships with those stakeholders and other sectors.

What leadership traits do you think are most essential for law firm leaders right now — especially as the industry evolves rapidly?

Enterprise thinking – the ability to shift into a business leadership mindset, staying open to other perspectives to forward the business’s priorities – seems to be essential across a variety of companies. Relationship building and management (influencing across) is equally as important.

There’s often a stigma in law around asking for help — whether for mental health or leadership coaching. Do you see that changing?

I’m not aware of such a stigma and have not worked with anyone for whom that was an issue. Perhaps by having a coach, they have already asked for help, and their firm’s/company’s culture has normalized coaching as an investment in high performers.

For law firms or companies where asking for help is difficult or not accepted by their culture, then this would seem infinitely more difficult for coaching. As I mentioned earlier, the very nature of legal work is one of justice and protection, so asking for help may be viewed as being too vulnerable, and that would seem too risky.

How do you help clients move past that hesitation?

If clients are unsure or hesitant, we take time to discuss all questions and concerns, especially noting confidentiality within the coaching engagement. I also might share other resources to help clients learn more about coaching first and give some small, safe options as to where to begin.

Law firms can be competitive environments. How do you help lawyers move from a focus on individual achievement to more collaborative leadership?

It helps to have a common project that they can collaborate on together, both within their roles and outside of them. For example, a cross-functional, co-associate, or co-partner initiative on a particular new law or regulation, educating peers or clients on new regulations and the impacts across the company or on clients, or co-leading a company initiative to mentor college graduates who aspire to be attorneys.

For law firm leaders investing in coaching, what does success look like?

I suppose it is different for each law firm, and/or legal department in a corporation. For some law firms, having senior associates and junior partners (high potentials) prepared to understand the business leadership aspects of running a law firm, as well as working well with their people. This might include delegating, prioritizing, building relationships and taking care of themselves to bring their best to work. It also might include strategies for building a book of business.

For corporate law firms, developing an enterprise mindset among their attorneys, having a team that is high-performing where attorneys work well together, and contribute in thought leadership. It may also include the legal department being seen as a thought partner in the enterprise. Additionally, it may mean developing a succession pipeline where direct reports develop leadership plans that they refine over the years. It might also include delegating, prioritizing, relationship building and appropriate self-care.

How do you measure the impact of coaching on performance or firm culture?

I would first define what does success look like to that company’s or firm’s culture. For example, are there specific leadership behaviors to be cultivated and celebrated? The coaching works best when it fits into those cultural values.

Typically, we measure the client’s current performance in leadership through a customized 360 that reflect those cultural leadership values. During the coaching engagement, feedback measures are built into a leadership plan with stakeholder engagement. Then towards the end of the engagement, we measure progress by selecting a few stakeholders and asking how much progress has been made (or not) in certain areas outlined by the plan. The client leader and those sponsors can determine where the leader is on their path at that point and what plans are made to sustain progress. Ideally, the coaching catalyzes leadership performance, which supports cultural values.

https://www.arielgroup.com/

Florida Approves New Law Expanding Access to Experimental Stem Cell Treatments.

Florida lawmakers have passed a new law aimed at giving patients broader access to stem cell therapies that haven’t yet cleared federal approval, a decision that could reshape the state’s approach to cutting-edge medicine.

The bill, known as Senate Bill 1768, was approved unanimously by both chambers of the Florida Legislature and is expected to take effect on July 1, 2025, pending the governor’s signature.

At its core, the legislation grants licensed physicians in Florida the ability to administer certain non-FDA-approved stem cell treatments, but only within tightly defined boundaries and under close oversight.

What the Bill Actually Does

The new measure allows allopathic and osteopathic doctors to offer stem cell therapies for orthopedic issues, chronic pain, and wound healing, even if those therapies haven't received the green light from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

But this isn’t a free-for-all.

The law includes a series of safeguards that aim to protect patients from unproven or unsafe treatments.

Stem cell sources must meet ethical standards. The law prohibits the use of cells from aborted fetuses or embryos. Only adult stem cells and those derived from umbilical cord blood or similar ethically acceptable sources are permitted.
Only accredited facilities can be used. Stem cells must come from FDA-registered labs that follow good manufacturing practices and hold accreditation from organizations like the National Marrow Donor Program or the American Association of Tissue Banks.
Full transparency is required. Doctors must notify patients, in writing, that the treatment is not FDA-approved. That notice must also appear in any advertisements or promotional materials.
Informed consent is mandatory. Before treatment, patients must sign a document acknowledging the risks, possible benefits, and alternative options available.

What Happens if Doctors Don’t Follow the Rules?

The law doesn’t just set up guidelines, it includes serious consequences for breaking them.

Doctors who fail to comply could face felony charges, along with professional sanctions from the Florida Department of Health and relevant medical boards.

Why Lawmakers Say the Risk Is Worth It

Proponents of the bill, including Republican Senator Jay Trumbull, argue that Florida’s move is about more than just deregulation. It’s about hope.

“Some patients have exhausted all traditional options,” Senator Trumbull said during a floor debate.

“This bill gives them a chance to try something new, something that could change their lives, without compromising ethics or safety.”

Advocates believe Florida could now become a model for other states exploring access to experimental treatments.

But Not Everyone’s Convinced

Medical ethicists and public health advocates warn that loosening the rules around unapproved therapies might lead to exploitation or unintended harm.

They stress that stem cell therapies, while promising need more clinical research to prove their effectiveness and long-term safety.

“There’s a reason we have the FDA,” said one expert familiar with the legislation. “Patients deserve innovation, yes, but they also deserve protection from the unknown.”

As the July launch date approaches, doctors, clinics, and regulators are preparing to interpret and implement the new law — one that blends cautious optimism with a leap of faith.

Related Facts About Stem Cell Therapies and U.S. Regulations

Stem cell therapies are already being used in the U.S. for certain conditions like: blood cancers and immune disorders, but most regenerative treatments remain under clinical trial or investigational status.
According to the FDA, many marketed stem cell treatments lack scientific evidence or proper approval. The agency has issued multiple warnings about unproven products offered by rogue clinics.
A 2021 study published in Cell Stem Cell found over 1,200 businesses in the U.S. advertising stem cell therapies directly to consumers, many of which did not comply with federal safety standards.
Right to Try laws, enacted federally in 2018 and adopted in various states, allow terminally ill patients to access experimental drugs. Florida’s new law builds on that idea but focuses specifically on non-terminal conditions like orthopedic injuries and chronic pain.
The global stem cell market is projected to exceed $30 billion by 2030, driven by demand for alternative therapies, especially in orthopedics, neurology, and cosmetic medicine.

Latham & Watkins Advises Cobalt Holdings on Proposed $230M London IPO.

Latham & Watkins is advising Cobalt Holdings plc on its proposed $230 million initial public offering (IPO) on the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange, expected to take place in June 2025.

Cobalt Holdings, a newly formed company designed to purchase and hold physical cobalt, aims to become the only publicly listed vehicle offering pure-play exposure to cobalt prices, without the risks tied to exploration, development, or mining operations.

As part of the IPO, global commodities giant Glencore has agreed to take a 10% stake in the company. Anchorage Capital has also committed as a cornerstone investor.

Cobalt Without the Dirt

Unlike traditional resource firms, Cobalt Holdings will not mine or refine cobalt. Instead, its business model is built around long-term ownership of the physical metal, offering public market investors direct access to the commodity through equity.

“Our strategy is simple,” said CEO Jake Greenberg.
“We provide equity investors with direct, pure-play exposure to cobalt prices through a low-cost, low-risk structure, without the operational burdens of mining.”

This year, the company plans to acquire 6,000 tonnes of cobalt, which would represent about 33% of the global cobalt surplus in 2025, based on data from Benchmark Mineral Intelligence.

A Strategic Bet on Soaring Demand

Cobalt demand has already more than doubled between 2015 and 2024, driven by the rapid growth of electric vehicles and battery storage. Projections show demand rising another 54% by 2031.

At the same time, supply pressure is mounting. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) - which dominates global cobalt output, has begun to enforce export restrictions, limiting metal availability at a time of rising consumption.

“The long-term price of cobalt has historically been far above the spot market,” Jake Greenberg noted.
“Now is the right moment to build a strategic stockpile and prepare for the supply-demand rebalance that’s coming.”

Mr. Greenberg added that the anticipated tightening in cobalt markets could help catalyze new investment in mining and refining capacity in the West, which is vital for advancing the global energy transition.

The Latham & Watkins team advising on the proposed IPO is led by corporate partners Anna Ngo, Shing Lo, Sam Newhouse, and James Inness, with support from counsel Koushik Prasad and associates Phoebe Richardson and Isabelle Knapton. Additional specialist advice was provided by counsel Evelyne Girio and associate Daniel Chen.

Cobalt Holdings plc is a Cayman Islands-based investment company that offers public equity investors pure-play exposure to cobalt prices by acquiring and holding physical cobalt. The company avoids mining risks through a low-cost, outsourced model and is led by CEO Jake Greenberg, co-founder of Yellow Cake plc.

Latham & Watkins, founded in 1934, is a global law firm with more than 3,000 lawyers across major business and financial centers. The firm advises top companies, investors, and institutions on high-stakes transactions, regulatory matters, and litigation. Known for its collaborative culture and deep industry knowledge, Latham delivers practical, strategic legal solutions worldwide.

FTC Orders Cerebral to Pay $5 Million in Refunds After Subscription Scandal.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ordered Cerebral, Inc. to issue more than $5 million in refunds to former customers, following a sweeping investigation into the mental health startup’s business practices.

The agency accused the telehealth provider of misleading users about how to cancel subscriptions and of mishandling sensitive personal health data by sharing it with third parties without proper consent.

As part of the settlement, over 40,000 consumers will receive compensation.

These refunds are designated for individuals who tried to cancel their subscriptions on or before May 2022 but continued to be billed, some for extended periods after their initial cancellation requests.

A Pattern of Deception

Launched with the promise of making mental health treatment more accessible, Cerebral marketed itself as a flexible, cancel-anytime service. But behind the scenes, regulators say, the company created unnecessary hurdles to cancellation, requiring users to navigate a time-consuming, often confusing process to end their memberships.

“Consumers deserve clear, honest information when they sign up for a subscription, especially when their personal health is involved,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

“Cerebral didn’t just make it hard to cancel, they charged people after they tried to leave, and they mishandled sensitive health data along the way.”

Sharing Data Without Consent

The FTC’s findings go beyond billing issues. Investigators say Cerebral also failed to protect user privacy by disclosing personal health information to third parties, including marketing and analytics firms, without proper consent.

This data reportedly included details about users’ mental health conditions, prescriptions, and therapy sessions.

Such actions, regulators argue, not only violated consumer trust but also ran afoul of federal privacy laws, including the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA).

What Consumers Need to Know

Eligible customers will receive payments either by mail or through PayPal. Paper checks must be deposited within 90 days, while PayPal users are encouraged to redeem their payments within 30 days.

The refund process is being managed by Epiq Systems, an independent administrator hired by the FTC.

Consumers with questions about their refunds can call 1-888-884-6036 or email info@CerebralRefund.com. Importantly, the FTC reminds recipients that it never asks for payment or personal banking information to issue a refund.

Cerebral’s Ongoing Legal and Ethical Challenges

1. DOJ Settlement Over Controlled Substances

In late 2024, Cerebral agreed to pay $3.65 million to settle allegations brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) involving its prescription practices. Regulators found that the company failed to prevent the unauthorized distribution of controlled substances, including stimulants like Adderall.

From 2019 to 2022, Cerebral allegedly created incentives for high prescription volumes and allowed patients to obtain duplicate prescriptions by creating multiple accounts.

2. FTC Action on Data Privacy Violations

Earlier in April 2024, the Federal Trade Commission proposed an enforcement order against Cerebral for disclosing users' sensitive health information, such as diagnoses and treatments to third parties for advertising purposes.

The order, still pending court approval, included a $7 million penalty and would ban the company from using such data for marketing.

3. Major Data Breach Affects Millions

In 2023, Cerebral disclosed a massive data breach involving more than 3.1 million individuals. The incident stemmed from the company’s use of tracking pixels, which unintentionally leaked personal health information to tech platforms.

The breach drew scrutiny from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), further damaging the company’s public image.

4. FTC Refund Order in 2025

Most recently, in May 2025, the FTC ordered Cerebral to distribute more than $5 million in refunds to over 40,000 users after finding the company used deceptive practices to trap customers in recurring subscriptions. The agency also cited improper data handling as part of the violation.

5. Leadership Turnover Amid Crisis

The company’s internal upheaval has mirrored its external challenges. Co-founder and CEO Kyle Robertson stepped down in 2022. His successor, Dr. David Mou, exited in December 2024. As of early 2025, Cerebral is being led by interim CEO Brian Reinken, marking the third leadership change in as many years.

U.S. Halts Southern Border Livestock Imports Amid Screwworm Threat.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the suspension of all live cattle, horse, and bison imports across the Southern border as of Sunday, citing a growing threat posed by the New World screwworm, a parasitic flesh-eating pest detected in southern Mexico over the past year.

What Is the Legal Basis for the Ban?

Under the authority of the Animal Health Protection Act and related federal regulations, the USDA has broad powers to halt imports to protect domestic animal health.

This suspension leverages those powers to prevent reintroduction of a parasite that was eradicated from the U.S. decades ago through intensive sterilization programs.

Secretary Rollins framed the decision not as punitive, but as "a matter of national food and animal security," affirming that the agency is "acting swiftly to protect the integrity of our livestock industry."

Understanding the New World Screwworm Threat

The New World screwworm fly (Cochliomyia hominivorax) poses a unique threat to warm-blooded animals, including livestock and in rare cases, humans.

Female flies lay eggs in open wounds, and the emerging larvae consume living tissue, often leading to mutilation or death if untreated.

While eradicated in the U.S. since the early 1980s, the parasite continues to affect regions of Latin America. Its northward spread toward the U.S. border has raised serious concerns among veterinary and agricultural officials.

Cross-Border Trade and Legal Ramifications

The import halt has major implications for international agricultural trade, livestock contracts, and biosecurity compliance:

Trade Disruption: The U.S. imports hundreds of thousands of livestock animals annually from Mexico, particularly for feedlots and slaughterhouses in Texas and other border states. The sudden halt is expected to disrupt supply chains and raise legal questions about force majeure clauses in livestock contracts.
Regulatory Oversight: Livestock exporters and importers must remain compliant with USDA and APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) regulations, which could tighten further in response to the ongoing parasite threat.
Binational Cooperation: Mexican Agriculture Secretary Julio Berdegué expressed hope for a quick resolution, stating: “We don’t agree with this measure, but we’re confident we’ll reach an agreement sooner rather than later.” Mexico and the U.S. have previously collaborated successfully on screwworm eradication and inspection protocols.

Legal and Policy Considerations for Stakeholders

Agricultural law practitioners should monitor:

USDA policy updates and inspection protocols for livestock trade
Insurance and liability implications for livestock losses due to suspended contracts
Cross-border commercial disputes triggered by force majeure claims
International trade agreements potentially affected by unilateral health measures

The USDA has confirmed it will review the ban monthly, and emphasized its commitment to re-opening trade once the screwworm threat is contained.

In the meantime, increased surveillance, field inspections, and containment strategies are being deployed, including the use of USDA "tick riders" - inspectors on horseback patrolling the southern border.

For legal professionals, this incident serves as a powerful reminder of the increasingly complex intersection between agricultural law, international trade policy, and biosecurity regulation.

The abrupt suspension of cross-border livestock imports highlights the extent to which disease control measures can trigger significant legal and commercial consequences across multiple jurisdictions.

As climate change accelerates the migration of pests and pathogens, and as zoonotic diseases pose greater threats to both public health and global food security, regulatory responses are likely to become more frequent, more urgent, and more legally intricate.

Clifford Chance Advises Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe on Engineering Development Agreement with Westinghouse and Bechtel.

Global law firm Clifford Chance has played a key advisory role in the signing of a landmark Engineering Development Agreement (EDA) between Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe (PEJ) and a U.S. consortium led by Westinghouse and Bechtel, paving the way for the construction of Poland’s first nuclear power plant.

The agreement, finalized this week, secures the framework for continued collaboration and outlines the engineering and project responsibilities necessary to move the historic energy project forward.

With construction plans centered on Westinghouse’s AP1000® reactor technology, the deal is seen as a cornerstone of Poland’s long-term energy independence strategy.

“We have developed an agreement based on solid foundations, a well-thought-out structure and a clear division of responsibilities. The agreement signed today is a platform for further cooperation and an example of mutually beneficial compromise.

It maintains the highest technological and safety standards, while ensuring reasonable costs and responsible risk and schedule management. I am convinced that together with our American partners we are consistently moving closer to concluding a final agreement for the construction of this power plant,” said Piotr Piela, acting President of PEJ.

A Strategic Shift Toward Energy Security

The agreement reflects Poland’s growing commitment to diversifying its energy sources and reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Once completed, the plant is expected to provide reliable, low-carbon energy while boosting both the Polish and American economies.

“This agreement underscores the importance of the U.S.-Poland partnership, as we cooperatively work to strengthen the energy security of Poland and the region through this historic project,” said Dan Sumner, Interim CEO of Westinghouse.

“Not only will the proven, advanced AP1000 reactor provide abundant and reliable energy to Poland, it will bring billions of zlotys to Poland’s economy and create thousands of jobs in both countries during construction and plant operation. We look forward to a continued strong relationship for many decades to come.”

So far, the project has engaged more than 700 Polish suppliers through a series of symposia held across the country, with a strong emphasis on local hiring and participation in the nuclear supply chain.

Craig Albert, President and COO of Bechtel, called the project “a long-term investment in Poland’s energy security and economic future,” adding that Bechtel remains “deeply committed to working alongside local communities, businesses, and partners.”

Clifford Chance advised PEJ on all legal aspects of the agreement, with Partner Daniel Kopania and Counsel Professor Piotr Bogdanowicz leading the team.

They were supported by Senior Associate Katarzyna Pączek and Associates Maria Janiak and Jan Staszak, who played key roles in drafting and structuring the EDA.

Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe (PEJ) is a state-owned company leading the development of Poland’s first nuclear power plant. Established in 2021, PEJ is responsible for implementing the country’s nuclear energy program to boost energy security and reduce carbon emissions. Its flagship project is located in Lubiatowo-Kopalino, with support from international partners including Westinghouse and Bechtel.

Clifford Chance is a global law firm with over a century of history and a presence in 23 countries through 34 offices. A member of the prestigious Magic Circle, the firm is recognized for its deep expertise in banking, corporate law, finance, dispute resolution, and tax.

It advises a broad spectrum of clients, including multinational corporations, financial institutions, governments, and not-for-profits by combining international best practices with local market insight. Known for its collaborative culture and forward-thinking approach, Clifford Chance delivers innovative, high-quality legal solutions across every major industry and sector.

D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb Sues Kenneth Brewer Sr. for Diverting $1.25M in Nonprofit Funds.

Secret Bonuses Through a For-Profit Subsidiary

Misuse of Property Sale Funds

Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Broader Nonprofit Enforcement Push

More Articles

Ziploc Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Hidden Microplastics.

More Articles

Kirkland & Ellis Adds Andrew J. Gershon and Semhar M. Woldai to Investment Funds Group.

More Articles

More Articles

Transforming Legal Leadership: Executive Coach Trinnie Houghton on Helping Attorneys Thrive in High-Stress Roles.

Florida Approves New Law Expanding Access to Experimental Stem Cell Treatments.

What the Bill Actually Does

What Happens if Doctors Don’t Follow the Rules?

Why Lawmakers Say the Risk Is Worth It

But Not Everyone’s Convinced

Related Facts About Stem Cell Therapies and U.S. Regulations

More Articles

Latham & Watkins Advises Cobalt Holdings on Proposed $230M London IPO.

Cobalt Without the Dirt

A Strategic Bet on Soaring Demand

More Articles

FTC Orders Cerebral to Pay $5 Million in Refunds After Subscription Scandal.

A Pattern of Deception

Sharing Data Without Consent

What Consumers Need to Know

Cerebral’s Ongoing Legal and Ethical Challenges

1. DOJ Settlement Over Controlled Substances

2. FTC Action on Data Privacy Violations

3. Major Data Breach Affects Millions

4. FTC Refund Order in 2025

5. Leadership Turnover Amid Crisis

More Articles

U.S. Halts Southern Border Livestock Imports Amid Screwworm Threat.

What Is the Legal Basis for the Ban?

Understanding the New World Screwworm Threat

Cross-Border Trade and Legal Ramifications

Legal and Policy Considerations for Stakeholders

More Articles

Clifford Chance Advises Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe on Engineering Development Agreement with Westinghouse and Bechtel.

A Strategic Shift Toward Energy Security

More Articles

About Lawyer Monthly

Follow Lawyer Monthly