United States

HOUSTON. July 10, 2026 – Beck Redden secured an over $2.3 million jury verdict on behalf of Jake Austin Guarino and his parents in a products liability case involving a defective synthetic turf field installed at a local high school outside of Austin, Texas. The case centered on allegations that Defendant FieldTurf USA, Inc. manufactured, marketed, and sold a defective synthetic turf product containing prematurely degrading fibers that caused the turf system to fail years earlier than marketed and expected. Despite FieldTurf marketing the turf system as durable, safe, and engineered for optimal athletic performance, the evidence showed the turf fibers rapidly and unevenly deteriorated, matted, cracked, and fibrillated, creating a hazardous playing surface with dangerously inconsistent traction that caused the injuries at issue in the case. The evidence also showed that FieldTurf knew the significant defects in its turf system years before selling and installing the field at issue. Despite this knowledge, the company continued to market the product as safe and durable while attributing premature failures to maintenance issues or purchaser mishandling rather than disclosing known defects to purchasers and end users, including student athletes and their parents. Jake Austin Guarino, a highly competitive lacrosse player, suffered two ACL tears three years apart—the first in 2013 to this left ACL, and the second in 2016 to his right, healthy ACL—in the same area of the same defective synthetic turf field manufactured and sold by FieldTurf and installed at Vandegrift High School’s Monroe Stadium in 2009. Over time, Mr. Guarino underwent multiple surgeries and endured extensive recovery periods as a result of his injuries, and he will require significant treatment in the future to further repair and preserve his knees. After years of litigation, Beck Redden prevailed at trial, obtaining an over $2.3 million verdict for the Guarino family, totaling over $2.7 million with prejudgment interest. Prior to trial, the team secured spoliation sanctions based on FieldTurf’s failure to preserve the field and successfully defeated four mandamus petitions, preserving key trial court rulings and positioning the case for a favorable outcome. This result highlights Beck Redden’s strength in complex products liability and personal injury litigation, including navigating extensive pretrial motion practice and enforcing discovery obligations in high-stakes cases involving serious injuries. The Beck Redden team was led by partners Troy Ford and Jackie Furlow, with support from associates Cassie Maneen and Kelsey Eyanson and paralegal Cyndi Causseaux. Appellate partner Nicholas Bruno, with support from Elisabeth Butler and John Adcock, provided critical assistance in defeating mandamus challenges and securing key procedural victories throughout the litigation. The case is: Jake Louis Guarino, Jill Guarino, & Jake Austin Guarino v. FieldTurf USA, Inc., No. D 1 GN 18 001690, in the 419th Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas. About Beck Redden LLP Beck Redden LLP is a litigation firm that handles a wide range of disputes including energy, oil and gas, product liability, antitrust, securities, environmental, insurance coverage, legal and accounting malpractice, and intellectual property cases.

SAN FRANCISCO, July 7, 2026 — Arnold & Porter announced today that Sunita Bali has joined the firm’s Complex Litigation practice as a partner. Sunita will be resident in the firm’s San Francisco office. Her arrival builds on the firm’s ongoing West Coast strategic growth and follows several other additions in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle this year. Ken Chernof, co-chair of Arnold & Porter’s Complex Litigation group, said: “Sunita is an exceptional litigator whose command of privacy law, consumer class actions, and content moderation disputes makes her an outstanding addition to our technology industry practice. She brings sophisticated experience in some of the most consequential areas of technology litigation, and we are delighted to welcome her.” Jonathan Hughes, head of Arnold & Porter’s San Francisco and Silicon Valley offices, added: “Sunita’s arrival not only continues to further strengthen our West Coast litigation platform, but her depth in privacy and technology litigation and her track record of success will be a tremendous asset to our clients and team across the U.S.” A seasoned commercial litigator, Sunita represents technology, retail, and other clients in complex privacy, consumer class-action, and other commercial litigation disputes. She advises clients on compliance with privacy and consumer protection laws, particularly those that regulate the collection and use of biometric and other sensitive data. Sunita regularly defends large, high-stakes privacy and consumer class-action cases brought under the federal Wiretap Act, the Stored Communications Act, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, and California’s consumer protection laws. She also has well over a decade of experience litigating and advising clients on content moderation issues and has represented some of the world’s largest companies in high-profile cases implicating Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment. In joining the firm, Sunita said: “Some of today’s most consequential legal battles in the technology sector involve the application of complex privacy and consumer protection laws to novel and developing technologies. Arnold & Porter’s multidisciplinary platform, deep bench of practitioners, and global reputation make it an ideal fit for my practice.” Sunita earned her J.D. from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law and her B.A. from Occidental College. About Arnold & Porter Arnold & Porter combines sophisticated regulatory, litigation, and transactional capabilities to resolve clients’ most complex issues. With over 1,000 lawyers practicing in 16 offices worldwide, we offer an integrated approach that spans more than 40 practice areas. Through multidisciplinary collaboration and focused industry experience, we provide innovative and effective solutions to mitigate risks, address challenges, and achieve successful outcomes.

"There is no hierarchy of service," the Third District Court of Appeal ruled. "Service via email is one way among several in which a Florida plaintiff can serve an international defendant." January 23, 2026 at 02:26 PM By Annie Mayne Third District Court of Appeal in Miami, FL. Photo: Candace West Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal ruled this week that foreign defendants can be served via email without having to prove due diligence or meet Hague Convention requirements—a decision the plaintiff’s attorney said would expedite litigation with international parties and defendant's counsel claimed created a "problematic" disadvantage for defendants living abroad. The panel decision is the appellate court's interpretation of a 2024 Florida statute guiding email service in litigation. In the underlying case, plaintiff Diaz Reus & Targ alleged Wepard Corp. Ltd. LLC and Forsun Boats Ltd. failed to pay legal fees and breached a contract. The Malta-based defendants were all served via email, which they argued violated the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, and that the plaintiff had failed to meet due diligence typically required for electronic service. But Third DCA's ruling found that Florida law requires due diligence only of domestic defendants, not of those living abroad. "[T]he foreign service statute does not require a showing of due diligence prior to the granting of email service," the Wednesday opinion reads. "There is no hierarchy of service. Service via email is one way among several in which a Florida plaintiff can serve an international defendant." Moving forward, plaintiffs will only have to seek leave of court, show service has been calculated to reasonably provide notice and prove that the means of service is not prohibited by an international agreement to serve defendants via email. Prince-Alex Iwu, senior counsel at Diaz Reus representing the m, told the Daily Business Review that the "landmark decision" provides clarity and will cut time spent serving international parties, which can often span months or years. "The problem with the process of service under the Hague Convention is that it was tedious. It usually took anywhere between six months and two years. Parties often found themselves stopped in the middle of service that was very ine]cient," he said. "This decision clari\es that you can attempt service by email in the st instance in Florida without attempting service under the Hague Convention." Carlos E. Alvarez, counsel at The Legal Team for the appellants, said his client had been hopeful that the court would set the same standard of diligence granted to domestic defendants. "We were hoping that the Third DCA would see, for foreigners, there would be some type of diligence required or some type of showing before you can just switch off to email service on top of an international treaty," Alvarez said in a phone interview. "There is a diligence requirement for residents, but for nonresidents, there isn't. I d that to be somewhat problematic." Alvarez, whose client is considering an appeal, noted that he appreciated the detailed reasoning provided in the opinion, and added that he himself has struggled through the "very meticulous and, in sense, antiquated processes" to serve defendants overseas. "In this new digital age, it helps, in some ways," he said.  

U.S. Africa critical minerals strategy seeks to build supply chains beyond Beijing’s control by Thembelani Moyo January 26, 2026 THE UNITED States is ramping up investment in African mining after concluding that its dependence on China for critical minerals has become a national security risk. The shift has placed U.S. Africa critical minerals strategy at the centre of Washington’s foreign and industrial policy. What was once an industrial concern is now treated like oil in the 1970s. Control of supply is power. Loss of access is vulnerability. “The United States is increasing its focus on African mining because it has identified critical mineral supply chains as a national security vulnerability,” Prince-Alex Iwu, senior counsel at international law firm Diaz Reus, told ZiMining. For decades, China built dominance not in mines, but in what comes after them. It controls the refining and processing stages that turn raw ore into usable material. China holds about 85% of global rare earth processing capacity and dominates battery-grade refining for cobalt, lithium and graphite. That grip gives Beijing leverage even when minerals are mined elsewhere. The scale of that power became visible after China imposed export restrictions on gallium, germanium, antimony and rare earths following U.S. curbs on semiconductor technology. Those moves sent a clear signal that supply chains could be switched off. “Recent Chinese export curbs have vividly illustrated how dependence on a single dominant supplier can be leveraged geopolitically,” the Miami-based trade lawyer said. Critical minerals underpin modern industry. They feed electric vehicles, renewable energy storage, advanced semiconductors and defence systems. Without them, factories cease and technologies fail. The U.S. is fully import-reliant for many of these materials and that threatens production, raises costs and weakens technological and military capacity. Washington’s response now runs through a collection of government agencies and partnerships. The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), the government’s development bank, has signed major infrastructure commitments in Africa’s transport corridors that will benefit mining exports. This includes its $553 million financing agreement to upgrade Angola’s Benguela rail line, known as the Lobito Atlantic Railway. Once complete, it will expand capacity and cut mineral transport costs to ports tenfold, improving logistics for copper and cobalt exports. The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) ties its financing to long-term contracts that secure supply chains for American buyers, ensuring that critical minerals financed abroad benefit U.S. manufacturing and defence needs. Alongside these institutions, the Minerals Security Partnership (MSP), a coalition of countries aimed at diversifying supply chains, promotes high environmental, social and governance standards with African partners and encourages transparent mining accords. The aim is to build alternative processing capacity, upgrade transport links and secure materials outside Chinese control. “The U.S. is attempting to break the single-point-of-failure model in global mineral supply chains,” Iwu said. Projects stretch from graphite in Mozambique to rare earth processing in Angola. The Lobito Corridor is being rebuilt to link the Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia and Angola, easing exports of copper, cobalt and other minerals. The strategy is not only about extraction, but it also targets refining plants, energy systems and logistics; it seeks to move African producers up the value chain. U.S. backed projects emphasise transparency, environmental standards and local participation. They are framed as partnerships rather than loans tied to opaque terms. For African producers, the shift carries promise. Greater local processing could keep more value onshore. It could create skilled jobs and support industrial growth beyond raw exports. “African nations stand to gain significantly through increased local value addition via midstream processing,” the mining and trade specialist said. Infrastructure matters too. Corridors like Lobito can reshape regional trade, cut transport costs and reduce dependence on single export routes. They can bind landlocked states into wider markets. The change is political as well as economic. Africa now sits inside a strategic contest between major powers. Minerals are no longer just exports but instruments of statecraft. However, the risks loom large. African governments must guard against unsustainable debt, environmental harm and elite capture. They must avoid repeating extractive models that deliver revenue without development. “They must also guard against repeating extractive models that deliver revenue without development.” China will not disappear. Its scale and technical depth in processing remain unmatched. Eroding that position will require years of policy commitment, private capital and African leverage. “It will, at a minimum, likely be a multi-decade process rather than a rapid shift,” he added. What has changed is leverage. For the first time in years, African states face competing courtship for their minerals. They can negotiate terms. They can demand processing, skills and infrastructure. Whether that leverage becomes industry, jobs and influence depends less on Washington or Beijing than on decisions taken in African capitals.