AIPLA CLE Webinar: Regulation, Risk & Resilience: The Nexus Between Professional Liability, Duty of Competence & Practitioner Well-Being
February 10, 2026 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM
Mental health issues and substance use disorders can affect any practitioner, in any setting, and at any time. Left untreated, they can destroy careers and lives. This program will discuss where the legal profession currently stands in relation to the substantial challenges presented by untreated mental health issues and substance use disorders and examine the nexus between ethical competence under the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct and practitioner well-being. This program will educate attendees on how to recognize the signs of an impaired attorney, how to approach the colleague and begin a conversation, and discuss the possible disciplinary and professional liability implications of an impaired practitioner’s conduct. In addition, the speakers will present best practices/effective risk management strategies, preventative measures, and proposed policy and well-being initiatives, that practitioners in any practice setting may implement to protect clients, themselves, and other firm members as well as save careers
Presented by:
Laurie Besden, Executive Director, Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers of Pennsylvania
Michael McCable, Partner, McCabe Ali LLP
Tracy Kepler, Director of LPL Risk Control, CNA
This event is free to AIPLA members who are not requesting CLE. Standard webinar pricing applies to those requesting CLE. CLE is included for our All-Access Pass holders and eligible Corporate Subscribers.
Pricing below only applies to those requesting CLE
| Registration Type | AIPLA Member Rate | Non-Member Rate |
| Individual Registration | $99 | $249 |
| 2-5 Attendees per Site | $249 | $399 |
| 6-10 Attendees per Site | $449 | $599 |
| 11-15 Attendees per Site | $649 | $799 |
| 16-20 Attendees per Site | $749 | $899 |
| 21+ Attendees per Site | $849 | $999 |
Special rate for AIPLA Solo Practitioner Members: $65
Special rate for AIPLA Student Members: $10
In response to Covid-19, AIPLA has put in-place a new process for Multiple Attendee Site registrations that allows each site registrant to participate in the webinar independently. Contact cle@aipla.org at least 3 business days prior to the live webinar for site registrations.
Paid Registration Includes:
- CLE certification/processing for applicable states. Reference CLE Information below for complete details.
- Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information.
Cancellation Policy:
To get full refund, registrant must request refund five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product.
System requirements:
Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.
Accessibility for hearing impaired:
AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact cle@aipla.org. We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.
CLE INFORMATION
CLE is approved with the following states:
- Alaska
- California
- Missouri
- New Jersey (Under New Jersey's Reciprocity Rule)
- New York (Under New York's Approved Jurisdiction Policy)
- Pennsylvania
- Texas
- Vermont
AIPLA will automatically apply for CLE accreditation in the following states:
- Illinois
- Minnesota
- Ohio
- Tennessee
- Virginia
- Washington
For information on CLE accreditation in all other states, please contact our CLE Department at cle@aipla.org. CLE credit may be available, but will require additional time for approval and CLE processing.
CLE Restrictions:
ATTENTION attorneys in Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Utah
These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit. Multiple attendees prohibited.
ATTENTION attorneys in Alabama and Rhode Island
AIPLA does not submit courses for approval in Alabama or Rhode Island. Attendees needing credit in these states may select the free, no CLE option to watch the webinar and use course materials and their certificate of attendance to request course approval directly from the State Bars.
ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona
Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply. AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.
ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire
New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53. The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.
Disclaimer: AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association. The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content. AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice. The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors. These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.
Add to:
News
-
AIPLA Comments on CNIPA Draft Measures for Prioritized Patent Examination
April 1, 2026
Arlington, VA. March 30, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) regarding the Draft Measures for the Administration of Prioritized Examination of Patents. -
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc
March 31, 2026
Arlington, VA. March 27, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889. AIPLA urges the Court to affirm the Federal Circuit’s application of the established Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard and inducement law in reviewing Hikma’s motion to dismiss Amarin’s claim that Hikma’s conduct, in combination with its “skinny label,” induced infringement of Amarin’s patented treatment methods. -
Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment
March 25, 2026
On March 25, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. The majority opinion limits contributory liability to situations where a party intended that its service be used for infringement, either by affirmatively inducing infringement or by selling a service tailored to infringement. A concurring opinion by Justice Sotomayor argues that the material contribution test should be retained, and that other forms of secondary liability can be found, which is consistent with the position asserted by AIPLA in its amicus brief filed on September 5, 2025. To read the opinion of the Court, please click here. -
AIPLA Comments on the Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China
March 23, 2026
Arlington, VA. February 9, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress regarding the latest Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China. AIPLA recognized the NPC’s efforts to streamline trademark procedures, strengthen protection, and address abusive and bad-faith filing practices. -
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in USAA v. PNC Bank
March 3, 2026
Arlington, VA. March 2, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in USAA v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 25-853, in support of USAA’s petition for certiorari, urging the Court to provide much-needed guidance to address the unpredictable and overly broad application of the judicial exceptions to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, particularly the “abstract idea” exception.
