APPELLATE PRACTICE

The firm also maintains an extensive appellate practice in the federal courts of appeals. Like its Supreme Court practice, the firm’s experience in the courts of appeals has covered a wide range of topics, focusing on difficult questions of federal law in consequential litigation. And as in its Supreme Court practice, the firm is committed to working closely with the lawyers who litigated the case in the trial court, forming collegial relationships that maximize clients’ prospects for success.

Representative Matters

  • In re: MCP No. 185 Open Internet Rule, Lead Case No. 24-7000 (6th Cir.) (pending) - representing intervenors in support of the FCC’s authority to issue net neutrality rules, which require broadband internet access service providers to treat all internet traffic equally. [Brief]

  • The Wonderful Company LLC v. Nut Cravings Inc., No. 23-7540 (2d Cir.) (pending) - representing The Wonderful Company in a trademark dispute alleging that Nut Cravings Inc.’s snack nut packaging infringers Wonderful’s trade dress. [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • Largan Precision Co. v. Motorola Mobility, Nos. 24-1414, 24-1468, 24-1540 (Fed. Cir.) (pending) - representing maker of smartphone lenses in three appeals from IPR proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • Apple v. Corellium, 2023 WL 3295671 (11th Cir. 2023) – successfully represented a technology company that creates virtualized iPhones for security researchers in copyright infringement suit brought by Apple. [Brief]

  • In re Facebook, Inc. Securities Litig., 84 F.4th 844 (9th Cir. 2023) – successfully represented securities fraud plaintiffs in class action arising from Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal. [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • Arkansas Teacher Retirement Sys. v. Goldman Sachs., 955 F.3d 254 (2d Cir. 2020) — successfully represented class of investors suing Goldman Sachs for securities fraud relating to its role in the subprime mortgage crisis. Subsequently represented class in appeal to the Supreme Court and on remand proceedings in the Second Circuit. [Brief]

  • Rafay v. Jackson, No. 20-35963 (9th Cir.) (pending) – represented a habeas petitioner seeking relief from a state conviction who was featured in the inaugural episodes of Netflix’s documentary series “The Confession Tapes.” [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • United States v. Turner, 841 F. App’x 557 (4th Cir. 2021) – successfully represented federal habeas petitioner who challenged the factual basis for his guilty plea. [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • U.S. Telecom Assoc. v. FCC, 855 F.3d 381 (D.C. Cir. 2017) – successfully represented intervenors defending Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality rules. [Brief]

  • Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd., 896 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2018) – successfully represented defendant LED manufacturers against claims of patent infringement and overturned $12 million jury verdict by convincing Federal Circuit that asserted patent was invalid as not enabled. [Opening Brief] [Reply Brief]

  • In re: World Trade Center Disaster Site, 521 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2008) – successfully represented 10,000 firefighters, law enforcement officers, and construction workers in resisting various assertions of immunity to claims for respiratory injuries arising from activities at the site of the World Trade Center disaster. Case subsequently settled for more than $800 million. [Brief]

  • California v. Altus Finance S.A., 540 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2008) – successfully obtained retrial on $800 million punitive damages claim on behalf of California Insurance Commissioner. [Brief]