Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives

This month, in Sysco Machinery Corp. v. DCS USA Corp., the Fourth Circuit upheld the dismissal of a trade secret case, holding that plaintiffs asserting Defend Trade Secret Act (“DTSA”) claims must identify the misappropriated trade secrets with “sufficient particularity.” 

Effective July 1, 2025, the Contracts Honoring Opportunity, Investment, Confidentiality, and Economic Growth (“CHOICE”) Act became law in Florida.

On July 7, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Apple Inc. v. NLRB (Case No. 24-60242) handed Apple a victory, declining to enforce the NLRB’s ruling that Apple had violated the National Labor Relations Act by unlawfully confiscating union literature left in an employee breakroom. 

In the case of Tarquinio v. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab (No. 24-1432), decided by the Fourth Circuit on June 25, 2025, the court addressed whether an employer had a duty under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to accommodate an employee who refused to provide medical documentation supporting her request for a COVID-19 vaccine exemption.

The Trump Administration’s recently passed Fiscal Year 2026 budget eliminates all funding for the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP).

Join our Hunton Labor and Employment team as they discuss how to plan and defend drug testing policies in the current legal landscape. 

Congratulations to Hunton’s Labor & Employment Team and individual attorneys for their Legal 500 US 2025 rankings!

In Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court held a disabled former employee who neither “holds” nor “desires” a job is not a “qualified individual” under the ADA and, thus, cannot sue for disability discrimination following her employer’s revocation of retiree health benefits. 

Congratulations to Hunton’s Labor and Employment, Immigration, and OSHA Practices, along with our 12 attorneys for their Chambers USA 2025 rankings!

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard based on their majority-group status.