Representative Matters

  • Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank, No. 23-980 (2024) - successfully represented securities plaintiffs in case concerning standard for alleging that risk factor statements in SEC filings are misleading. [Brief]

    Slack Techs. v. Pirani, No. 22-200 (2023) – represented securities fraud plaintiffs in case concerning the scope of Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933. [Brief]

    Escobar v. Texas, 143 S. Ct. 557 (2023) – successfully represented death row inmate who was convicted largely on the basis of false, misleading, and unreliable DNA evidence. [Petition] [Reply]

    Goldman Sachs Group Inc. v. Ark. Teachers Ret. Sys., 141 S. Ct. 1951 (2021) – successfully represented class of shareholders on class certification questions. [Brief]

    Google LLC v. Oracle Am., Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021) – successfully defended Google against Oracle’s claim that Android violated its copyright in the Java programming language. [Opening Brief] [Reply][Supplemental Brief]

    Omnicare v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund, 135 S. Ct. 1318 (2015) – successfully represented plaintiffs in securities fraud class action in case concerning standard for challenging misleading statements of opinion. [Brief]

    McFadden v. United States, 576 U.S. 186 (2015) – successfully represented criminal defendant in challenging standard for proving intent element of the Controlled Substances Analogue Enforcement Act. [Opening Brief] [Reply]

    BG Group v. Argentina, 134 S. Ct. 1198 (2014) – successfully represented energy company seeking to enforce international arbitration award against Argentina. [Opening Brief] [Reply]

    Jerman v. Carlisle, 130 S. Ct. 1605 (2010) – successfully represented homeowner in arguing that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act does not provide debt collectors a mistake of law defense. [Opening Brief] [Reply]

    Ledbetter v. Goodyear, 550 U.S. 618 (2006) – represented plaintiff in case involving the application of Title VII's limitations provision to claims of pay discrimination in employment. When the Court ruled 5-4 against our client, we assisted the client in testifying before Congress, which subsequently overruled the Court’s decision. [Opening Brief] [Reply]

    Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006) – co-counsel in successful challenge to constitutionality of special military tribunals established to try war crimes charges against terrorist suspects who are foreign nationals.

  • 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]

    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.) – successfully represented technology company that creates virtualized iPhones for security researchers in copyright infringement suit brought by Apple. [Brief]

    In re Facebook, Inc. Securities Litig., 87 F.4th 934 (9th Cir. 2023) – successfully represented securities fraud plaintiffs in class action arising from Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal. [Opening Brief] [Reply]

    Rafay v. Jackson, 2023 WL 2707187 (9th Cir. 2023) – 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]

    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]

    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]

    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]