In response to rising geopolitical tensions – from the Middle East to the Taiwan Strait to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine –the Biden Administration is increasingly using economic incentives and sanctions to assist the United States’ foreign policy objectives or mitigate the risk of increased conflict.
James Anderson
Jim Anderson is a litigator and trial lawyer. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation involving leading technology and pharmaceutical companies, as well as private equity, private credit, and venture funds. Jim leverages his technological background and expertise to represent clients in high-stakes business and intellectual property disputes.
Jim has experience litigating cases for clients in the life sciences, biotech, software, consumer electronics, and financial services industries. Jim has also handled lawsuits for venture and hedge funds, and real estate clients. He has litigated cases in courts throughout the United States, as well as before the International Trade Commission and Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has also represented foreign and domestic companies in disputes before international arbitration tribunals under ICC and CPR Rules.
In addition to his commercial litigation practice, Jim counsels and advises private equity and private credit clients in fund-fund, lender-sponsor, and portfolio company disputes. Jim leverages his courtroom experience to help these clients navigate regulatory and litigation risks.
Jim also advises clients on intellectual property strategy spanning the full range of patent, trademark, and trade secret protections. He has developed and maintained intellectual property portfolios in a broad range of industries, including consumer products, medical devices, machining and fabrication equipment, and semiconductor devices. Jim is registered to practice before the USPTO.
Jim also maintains an active pro bono practice. He has received awards for his work on behalf of victims of domestic violence and abuse.
Jim has a background in Mechanical Engineering, with a focus on energy, power, and fuel cell technologies. Prior to his career at Proskauer, Jim served as a judicial intern in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut and represented clients with the UConn Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Law Clinic.
The Macro-Economic Environment: What It Means for VC Firms
Hope for a resurgence during 2024 in Venture Capital fundraising, investment, and returns was strong at the beginning of this year, with optimism fueled by the recovery in 2023 of U.S. stock markets (lead by the performance of large tech companies) and anticipation about how AI might transform industries. Market observers were optimistic then that U.S. venture investment activity would pick up significantly from 2023 levels, which—based on PitchBook data—had reverted to the lower average level of investment seen during the period of 2018-2020 as compared to the robust levels of activity seen in 2021 and the first half of 2022. This hope was centered in large part on expectations about how the Federal Reserve would begin lowering interest rates.
Is Artificial Intelligence Inflating a Valuation Bubble?
Big fund-raising rounds and high valuations have some wondering whether the AI sector is in a bubble in the nature of the dotcom boom. As of this writing, OpenAI is valued at over $80 billion; Amazon added another $2.75 billion to its investment in Anthropic; and even some very early-stage startups, like France-based Mistral AI, have racked up hundreds of millions in venture-capital funding at valuations over a billion dollars. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichar has said AI could be more profound than the invention of electricity or the discovery of fire. Is the hype real?
Cybersecurity Continues to be a Focal Point for Regulators in 2024
The SEC’s new and proposed rules on cybersecurity and cyber-incident reporting will have a dual impact on private investment advisers and funds.
First, the proposal by the SEC will impose cybersecurity related obligations on investment advisers, registered investment companies and business development companies, with a final rule in this sector (the “adviser cybersecurity rule”) expected in April 2024.
Not Off the Hook: The SEC Addresses its Position on Exculpation And Indemnification For Private Fund Advisers
In its final Private Fund Adviser Rules adopted last year, the SEC dropped one of the more controversial proposed rules—the proposal to prohibit contractual exculpation or indemnification provisions that would shield or indemnify the adviser in matters involving the adviser’s negligence or breach of fiduciary duty. On its face, this was a concession to the fund management industry. However, the Rule’s Adopting Release asserted that the SEC believed the provision was not needed because the antifraud provisions of the Advisers Act already prohibited certain provisions that would be covered by the proposal. Because the SEC’s interpretation was based on current law (there is no grandfathering or “implementation date” in the future), we predict that contractual indemnification or exculpation provisions will remain firmly in the SEC’s sights for 2024. SEC exams and enforcement proceedings are likely to focus on these provisions, and they may be implicated in GP/LP disputes as well.
SEC Focus on Adviser-Led Secondaries Continues
Adviser-led secondary transactions have seen explosive growth over the last five years. That growth has brought increased regulatory concerns over the conflicts of interests inherent in these transactions and a perceived lack of transparency into this market. New SEC rules adopted in 2023 will arm regulators with additional tools to identify, exam and investigate market practices. It is therefore critical for managers running an adviser-led secondary transaction to not only comply with the new rules as they become effective but to structure any such transaction with the SEC’s concerns in mind.
A Tale of Two Regulators: The SEC and FCA Address AI Regulation for Private Funds
2023’s excitement for generative artificial intelligence (AI) prompted the SEC to respond on multiple fronts – stump speeches, rulemaking, new exam priorities and sweeps and previewing potential enforcement actions. SEC Chair Gary Gensler raised concerns regarding potential conflicts and investor harm resulting from the proliferation of AI and warned that an AI-caused financial crisis is nearly unavoidable absent regulation. The SEC adopted a number of initiatives in 2023 to respond to these perceived risks.
ESG in 2024: Traps for the Unwary
ESG continues to be a hot topic for 2024 for investors and regulators alike. The specific concerns investors and regulators have – and what they expect to develop over the coming months – differ, however, across jurisdictions, including because of the different maturity of existing regulation between the EU/UK and the US.
Ongoing Capital Challenges Portend Continued Portfolio Company Litigation Risk in 2024
Economic headwinds and the interest rate environment that developed over the course of 2023 increased financial stress on portfolio companies and portend heightened litigation risk in 2024 for portfolio companies and their private fund sponsors. Specifically, interest rate increases that accelerated through 2022 continued in 2023, and compounded existing economic stressors including tight liquidity and inflation coming out of 2020 and 2021, as well as increased cost and other burdens related to ESG and regulatory compliance. These pressures put portfolio companies in often unsustainable financial positions, causing them to prematurely seek liquidity events, violate debt covenants with lenders, and resort to bankruptcy, all of which has led to an increase in disputes and litigation, which we expect to continue in 2024.
Examining the SEC’s Slew of Recent Rules and Amendments
In a wave of SEC rulemaking this past year, representing a “new world order” event akin to Dodd-Frank, the SEC has provided itself with a fresh set of tools to increase regulatory and enforcement scrutiny on private funds. Among other things, certain of the rules could result in fundamental changes to market practices and greater disclosure to LPs. While ongoing litigation will determine the fates of the Private Fund Adviser Rules, the Short Sale Disclosure Rule, and the Securities Lending Rule, and while other rules are awaiting final adoption, the SEC concerns underlying the rulemaking will continue regardless.