Legal sources with official primary sources

Printed ·

Skip to main content
Skip to the answer

Back to the agent

Section node

Court order

Ryan LLC v. FTC, N.D. Tex., 20 August 2024

What this page is
Section node, Ryan LLC v. FTC, N.D. Tex., 20 August 2024
Checked against the official source
2026-08-15Changed
Responsible publisher
ExploreWorld Legal, editorial deskLiability position
Jurisdiction
16 CFR Part 910, 89 Fed. Reg. 38342
Section node
status
Read
2026-08-15
Hash
sha256:b68047779172cde8

Outcomes resting on this section

The rules below point to this section in their outcome. The verdict is a machine classification, not a judgment on an individual matter.

  • nc-ban-state

    The non-compete clause is void in the state

    California (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 16600 and 16600.5), Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 181.988), North Dakota (N.D. Cent. Code § 9-08-06) and Oklahoma (15 Okla. Stat. § 219A) void employee non-competes. The FTC federal rule (16 CFR Part 910) was set aside by a court on 20 August 2024.

    prohibited, Requirement applies

  • nc-other

    Validity is decided by state law

    The federal ban in 16 CFR Part 910 does not apply after Ryan LLC v. FTC on 20 August 2024. State law decides, often with a reasonableness test and income floors.

    risk, Requirement applies conditionally

Section nodes

The verdict is a machine classification of the outcome, not legal advice and not a compliance decision.

Verifiable trust signals

  • Six fixed blocks, one source per line
  • No sentence written by a language model
  • Engine version and read date on every answer
  • No customer data, no documents, no advice
  • Model card and audit published under the EU AI Act

Model cardAudit