[AI, Trademarks, and the Future of Professional Judgment] I enjoyed the opportunity to take part in Mark to the Future: Predictions for AI’s Impacts on Trademark Practice, a timely conversation on how AI is reshaping trademark law in practice. Grateful to Alt Legal and Bri Van Til for convening the discussion, and to Jing He for the thoughtful cross-border perspective from China. We explored where AI is genuinely helping trademark professionals today, such as search, monitoring, enforcement, and where it still creates real risks, particularly around over-confidence, accountability, and the quiet shifting of professional judgment. One takeaway I keep returning to: AI is changing the structure of trademark practice more than the doctrine itself. The tools are probabilistic and continuous; the law remains contextual and human. That gap matters for lawyers, clients, and institutions tasked with assigning responsibility when things go wrong. These are exactly the conversations the trademark community needs to be having now, as AI becomes embedded not just in workflows, but in how risk is perceived and advice is given. Thanks to everyone who joined us, and to Alt Legal for creating space for a nuanced, comparative discussion.

["Determinants of Socially Responsible AI Governance,” 1 of 13 standout pieces on Scholastica] Grateful to Scholastica for highlighting my article, “Determinants of Socially Responsible AI Governance,” as one of thirteen standout pieces in its 2025 lookback on leading trends in legal scholarship. The article develops a justice- and equity-centered framework for AI governance, using justice, equity, and the rule of law as core yardsticks for evaluating AI systems from development through deployment. It examines how AI can expand access to justice for marginalized communities while also entrenching inequality through biased data, opaque design choices, and governance gaps. Drawing on comparative analysis across the United States, European Union, China, and Singapore, the article shows how different regulatory models balance innovation, transparency, and accountability and argues for proactive, risk-based governance that embeds equity by design rather than relying on after-the-fact correction. I am thankful to Penn State Dickinson Law for its continued support of interdisciplinary and policy-engaged research, and to the Duke Law and Technology Review editors, readers and the scholarly community whose engagement continues to sharpen this work. https://dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/news/associate-dean-daryl-lims-article-highlighted-by-scholastica

[Tribute: John Marshall Dean John Corkery] This week, I attended the memorial service for John Corkery, former Dean of The John Marshall Law School. Together with those on the faculty who became my colleagues, John hired me for my first tenure-track position. That single decision changed the trajectory of my career. As a young scholar, being offered a first academic home matters enormously. John understood that. He also went further. While I was still pre-tenure, he requested I be the Director of the school’s flagship intellectual property center, an institution that was then nearly 80 years old and globally respected. I strove daily to be a good steward of his trust. John made the personal effort to show up, to attend programs, to support the work, and to signal publicly that junior faculty and their ideas mattered. Leadership, for him, was consistent and personal. I have been blessed to have good deans like him all through my career. It was great reconnecting with former colleagues, some of whom, like me, had since left Chicago and returned this week to honor John together with his family. That reunion spoke volumes about the reach of his influence and the community he helped build. Many of us bear similar stories, often unspoken, to leaders who opened doors at precisely the moment it mattered most. John lived a life well. Rest in peace, Dean Corkery. Rest in peace, John.