News & Types: クライアント・アドバイザリー

連邦裁判所、競業避止契約を禁止する連邦取引委員会（FTC）の最終規則の発効を全国的に阻止
8/21/2024
By: ノーリーン アムジャッド, ケヴィン ボアザン
Practices: 雇用／労働法／福利厚生
Executive Summary
On August 20, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a nationwide
injunction barring the Federal Trade Commission’s Final Rule from taking effect, which sought to ban
all non-compete agreements by September 4, 2024. The court concluded that the Final Rule was “anunlawful agency action” and found that the proper remedy under the Administrative Procedures Act
was to set aside the agency action in its entirety, providing nationwide relief from the FTC’s FinalRule.
On August 20, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade
Commission issued an order setting aside the FTC’s ban on employee non-competes. Specifically, the court
concluded that the FTC exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted the Final Rule, and that such wasarbitrary and capricious. The court’s order provides much-needed relief to employers, who have been left in astate of complete uncertainty following inconsistent rulings on the FTC’s authority to implement the Rule.
As we previously reported on July 23, 2024, the same court preliminarily enjoined the FTC from implementing
or enforcing the Final Rule against the specific plaintiffs in the Ryan case only, leaving open the possibility of
the Final Rule going into effect on its September 4, 2024 effective date. Then, on July 23, 2024, the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in ATS Tree Services, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission,
denied the company’s request for a preliminary injunction staying the Final Rule, finding that the FTC had
express legal authority to impose the nationwide non-compete ban pursuant to the FTC Act. Most recently, onAugust 14, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, in Properties of the Villages, Inc. v.
FTC, sided with the Ryan court and similarly limited its order blocking the Final Rule to only the specific plaintiff
in the case. These inconsistent rulings left many employers who have non-compete agreements with currentand former employees in a state of uncertainty and facing a dilemma regarding the best course of action with
the September 4 effective date looming.
Now, based on the Ryan court’s most recent order blocking the enforcement of the Final Rule on a national
basis for all employers (not just the plaintiffs in that case), businesses finally have some clarity and can halt
© 2024 Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell, Ltd. All rights reserved. 本書は、特定の事実や状況に関する法務アドバイスまたは法的見解に代わるものではありません。本書に含まれる内容は、情報の提供を目的としたものです。かかる情報を利用なさる場合は、弁護士にご相談の上、アドバイスに従ってください。本書は、広告物とみなされることもあります。

their plans to send notices to current and former employees advising that their non-competes are effectivelyvoid. While the FTC may appeal the Ryan court’s recent decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court, any final disposition of the issue could take years. For theforeseeable future, employers may continue enforcing non-compete agreements with current and former
employees in accordance with applicable state and local law.
If you have any questions about the contents of this publication, please contact Naureen Amjad, KevinBorozan or any other member of Masuda Funai’s Employment, Labor and Benefits Group.
Masuda Funai is a full-service law firm with offices in Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, and Schaumburg.

© 2024 Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell, Ltd. All rights reserved. 本書は、特定の事実や状況に関する法務アドバイスまたは法的見解に代わるものではありません。本書に含まれる内容は、情報の提供を目的としたものです。かかる情報を利用なさる場合は、弁護士にご相談の上、アドバイスに従ってください。本書は、広告物とみなされることもあります。