Appeal of FTC noncompete rule stayed another 60 days

On Thursday, July 10, 2025 — one day before the deadline to file a status report in the Ryan LLC v. FTC appeal — the FTC filed a corrected status report and unopposed motion to continue the stay of the appeal for another 60 days.

The FTC explained the need for additional time as follows:

[T]he Commission has undergone significant personnel changes, including the Senate confirmation and the swearing in of Commissioner Mark Meador. In light of these changes and the press of Commission business, some additional time is necessary to determine whether the Commission should reconsider its defense of the rule challenged in this case. Thus, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court extend the previously granted abeyance for an additional 60 days.

Recall of course that FTC Chair Ferguson and Commissioner Holyak submitted a 45-page dissent to the noncompete rule. Although Commissioner Mark Meador, the third Republican appointee, fills out the three-Republican majority, the two Democrat-designated seats remain in flux. For a quick reminder: President Trump removed the two Democrats (Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya), who, as promised, challenged their removal. That case is pending in federal court in DC.

Amid the ongoing uncertainty over the FTC’s composition and the direction it will take on the noncompete rule, the court granted the FTC’s motion yesterday, July 11, 2025, extending the stay and setting the deadline for the FTC to file another status to September 8, 2025.   

At this point, I think it’s fair to say that we can expect a similar motion and order in the The Properties of the Villages, Inc. v. FTC appeal. The status report is due in that case on July 18, 2025. 

Next steps

While we await the direction of the two appeals, keep an eye out for the FTC to pursue individual cases against companies where noncompetes are, in the FTC’s view, abusive or otherwise deceptive, unfair,  anticompetitive, or unscrupulous. As previously noted, I expect those to include:

• B2B no-poach agreements (by whatever name), as opposed to reasonable B2E (business-to-employee) nonsolicitation agreements;
• Companies using noncompetes for employees who clearly should not have them; and
• Companies using truly unfair training repayment agreements (pejoratively called “TRAPs”), and similar agreements.

Stay tuned.

Firm resources: 

We know how hard it is to keep up with the ever-changing laws and requirements around the country for how you can protect your trade secrets, customer goodwill, and the integrity of your workforce. To help, we have created the resources below (available for free). Each chart is regularly updated to reflect the latest developments. 

	50-State Noncompete Law Chart, the first of its kind and regularly updated (downloadable PDF) (to be updated for the new exemptions in Illinois and Pennsylvania)50-State and Federal Trade Secret Law Chart, providing a comparison of the trade secrets laws nationally to the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (downloadable PDF)
	Chart of Noncompete “Low-Wage” Thresholds and Criteria (downloadable)
	Notice requirements summary chart, providing details for each of the 8 states (plus D.C.) that has notice requirements related to noncompetes (downloadable PDF)
	“Changing Trade Secrets | Noncompete Laws” (dedicated blog page) now provides a current detailed summary of the changing landscape of trade secret laws and noncompete laws around the country, state by state and at the federal level
	Trade secret and other legitimate business interest protection plan strategy and checklist

We hope you find all of these resources useful. More will be coming.

And please note, we are grateful for all of the input we’ve received over the years. We welcome any suggestions for improvements that you may be willing to share.