C & T Newsletters
June 2026
Trump AI Executive Order Uses National Security Levers to Shape Frontier AI Development
Takeaway: The executive order positions frontier AI as a matter of national security, using voluntary participation, procurement influence, and classified evaluations to encourage alignment between leading AI developers and U.S. strategic interests without imposing direct regulation.
A new executive order issued by the Trump administration establishes a framework for evaluating and monitoring advanced AI systems through classified benchmarking, voluntary early-access programs, and national security oversight. While the order does not impose licensing requirements or direct regulation, it creates incentives for AI developers to cooperate with the federal government by linking participation to trust, procurement opportunities, and integration into critical infrastructure and government systems.
The framework also brings agencies such as the Treasury Department into AI risk assessments, signaling a focus on systemic economic and national security risks rather than solely technical concerns. This order also reflects a shift from broad AI governance toward treating frontier AI as strategic infrastructure, with the federal government influencing development through market access, security partnerships, and classified capability assessments rather than formal regulatory mandates.
FIFA Faces VARA Lawsuit Over Destruction of Dallas Mural
Takeaway: The Visual Artists Rights Act can provide significant protection for murals and other works of recognized stature, allowing artists to challenge the destruction or alteration of their artwork when proper notice and preservation opportunities are not provided.
Artist and conservationist Robert Wyland has filed a lawsuit against FIFA, a Dallas property owner, and a property management company, alleging that his 17,000-square-foot mural Ocean Life was destroyed without notice in violation of the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA). The mural, which depicts marine life and whales, is claimed to be a work of “recognized stature,” a key requirement for protection under VARA.
The lawsuit arises from the mural’s removal ahead of FIFA World Cup-related activities in Dallas and raises questions about whether Wyland was properly notified and given an opportunity to preserve the artwork. The case also highlights the broader scope of VARA, which grants artists certain “moral rights” over their works, including protection against intentional destruction or modification. Courts have previously applied VARA in notable disputes involving public murals, graffiti installations, unfinished artworks, and site-specific art, making the Wyland case another important test of the law’s reach and protections.
USPTO Warns of Rising Phishing and Imposter Scams Targeting IP Owners
Takeaway: Trademark and patent owners should remain vigilant and verify all unexpected USPTO-related communications, as phishing and impersonation scams are becoming increasingly sophisticated.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seeing an increase in phishing emails and imposter phone calls targeting trademark and patent owners. Scammers are using spoofed email addresses, fake invoices, fabricated deadlines, and caller IDs displaying “USPTO” to trick recipients into providing payments, credentials, or sensitive information. IP owners should be cautious of unsolicited communications, avoid clicking on suspicious links or attachments, and independently verify any questionable correspondence through official USPTO channels or their intellectual property counsel.
Rapper Eminem’s Publishers Advance Copyright Claims Against Meta
Takeaway: Online platforms may face direct copyright infringement claims for hosting unauthorized content in their own libraries, but secondary liability claims require concrete allegations that the platform intentionally encouraged infringement or directly profited from users’ infringing activities.
A Michigan federal judge has allowed music publishers representing rapper Eminem to proceed with direct copyright infringement claims against Meta, finding they plausibly alleged that the company reproduced and stored hundreds of copyrighted songs in the music libraries of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp without authorization. However, the court dismissed claims based on inducement, contributory infringement, and vicarious infringement, concluding that the publishers failed to adequately allege that Meta intentionally encouraged user infringement or received a direct financial benefit from users’ alleged unauthorized use of the songs. The ruling narrows the case to whether Meta’s own actions in hosting and storing the works infringed copyright, while reinforcing recent Supreme Court guidance that secondary liability requires specific evidence of intentional conduct and direct infringement by users.
USPTO Director Clarifies PTAB Review Standards in Tesla Patent Challenges
Takeaway: The USPTO is increasingly using discretionary review standards to shape PTAB proceedings, with factors such as parallel litigation, domestic manufacturing, and efficient use of agency resources playing a growing role in determining whether patent challenges move forward.
USPTO Director John Squires issued a series of decisions on America Invents Act patent challenges, granting five petitions, denying seven others, and providing guidance on when discretionary denial is appropriate. In an informative decision, Squires allowed seven inter partes review petitions filed by Tesla to proceed against patents owned by Bulletproof Property, finding that parallel district court litigation lacked a scheduled trial date and that Tesla’s commitment not to duplicate arguments reduced concerns about inefficiency and inconsistent outcomes. He also rejected arguments based on prior USPTO consideration of certain references and patent owners’ settled expectations, while emphasizing that domestic manufacturing activities may weigh against discretionary denial. The decisions continue a broader trend under Squires’ leadership of increased scrutiny of PTAB institution requests, contributing to a significant decline in institution rates and AIA petition filings compared with previous years.
Retailers and Restaurant Chains Hit With NFC Patent Infringement Suits
Takeaway: Even after patents expire, patent owners may pursue damages for alleged infringement that occurred while the patents were still in force, exposing companies that use widely adopted payment-processing technologies to significant retrospective liability.
Near Field Electronics LLC has filed a series of patent infringement lawsuits in Texas federal court against major retailers and restaurant chains, including The Home Depot, Macy’s, AT&T, Dollar Tree, Lowe’s, Michaels, Flower Child, and Shake Shack. The complaints allege that the companies use near field communication (NFC) technology in payment systems that infringe five patents related to card-reading and USB interface technologies. Near Field contends that NFC-enabled payment terminals incorporating certain electronic components unlawfully practiced the patented inventions during the life of the patents, which expired between 2021 and 2026. The lawsuits seek damages for alleged infringement occurring before the patents expired and continue a broader enforcement campaign in which Near Field has asserted the same patents against numerous companies across multiple industries.
USPTO Signals Patent Challengers Must Choose Between IPR and Reexamination
USPTO Signals Patent Challengers Must Choose Between IPR and Reexamination
A recent USPTO decision denying Geotab Inc.’s request for ex parte reexamination of a patent after its inter partes review (IPR) petition was discretionarily denied is being viewed as a significant signal that patent challengers may not get multiple opportunities to contest the same patent. Although the merits of Geotab’s invalidity arguments were never evaluated in the earlier IPR proceeding, the USPTO relied on Section 325(d) to reject the reexamination request because it presented substantially the same arguments. Practitioners say the decision reflects the agency’s growing effort to limit repeat challenges and preserve the finality of patent rights. The ruling comes amid a sharp decline in IPR institution rates under USPTO leadership and a corresponding surge in ex parte reexamination filings, prompting concerns that the agency may increasingly scrutinize or restrict reexaminations used as a fallback after unsuccessful IPR attempts.
Cislo & Thomas LLP Spotlight
Cislo & Thomas Sponsors Safe Places Charity Golf Tournament
This month, Cislo & Thomas LLP sponsored a charity golf tournament for Safe Places for Women. This organization provides compassionate transitional living housing, healing support, and essential resources for survivors of sex trafficking, sexual exploitation, and prostitution, including those facing addiction or substance-use challenges as a result of their trauma. Our firm is happy to sponsor organizations with such outstanding missions to the community.
Previous Newsletters
