{"data":{"filter_options":{"titles":[{"name":"Partner","value":"Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops","value":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops"},{"name":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office","value":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office"},{"name":"Partner / General Counsel","value":"Partner / General Counsel"},{"name":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono","value":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer"},{"name":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice","value":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice"},{"name":"K\u0026S Talent Partner","value":"K\u0026S Talent Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer"},{"name":"Deputy General Counsel","value":"Deputy General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Counsel","value":"Senior Counsel"},{"name":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations","value":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations"},{"name":"Counsel","value":"Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Associate","value":"Senior Associate"},{"name":"Associate","value":"Associate"},{"name":"Senior Lawyer","value":"Senior Lawyer"},{"name":"Senior Attorney","value":"Senior Attorney"},{"name":"Attorney","value":"Attorney"},{"name":"Consultant","value":"Consultant"},{"name":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions","value":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions"},{"name":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor","value":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor"},{"name":"Government Relations Advisor","value":"Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Patent Agent","value":"Patent Agent"},{"name":"Senior Advisor","value":"Senior Advisor"},{"name":"Associate General Counsel","value":"Associate General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Government Relations Advisor","value":"Senior Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Director of Operations","value":"Director of Operations"},{"name":"Chief Information Officer","value":"Chief Information Officer"},{"name":"Chief Marketing Officer","value":"Chief Marketing Officer"},{"name":"Director of Office Operations","value":"Director of Office Operations"},{"name":"Chief Revenue Officer","value":"Chief Revenue Officer"},{"name":"Chief Recruiting Officer","value":"Chief Recruiting Officer"},{"name":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer","value":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer"},{"name":"Director of Community Affairs","value":"Director of Community Affairs"},{"name":"Tax Consultant","value":"Tax Consultant"},{"name":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations","value":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations"},{"name":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration","value":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration"},{"name":"Senior Office Manager","value":"Senior Office Manager"},{"name":"Director of Operations Europe","value":"Director of Operations Europe"},{"name":"Pro Bono Deputy","value":"Pro Bono Deputy"},{"name":"Law Clerk","value":"Law Clerk"},{"name":"Chair","value":"Chair"}],"schools":[{"name":"(Commercial Law), in front of Monash University, Australia","value":3045},{"name":"Aberystwyth University","value":3004},{"name":"Albany Law School","value":2118},{"name":"American University Washington College of Law","value":3042},{"name":"American University, Washington College of Law","value":2839},{"name":"American University, Washington College of Law","value":3024},{"name":"Appalachian School of Law","value":2891},{"name":"Ateneo de Manila University","value":2914},{"name":"Atlanta's John Marshall Law School","value":2830},{"name":"Ave Maria School of Law","value":2892},{"name":"Baylor University School of Law","value":181},{"name":"Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law","value":2619},{"name":"Binghamton University","value":3002},{"name":"Bond University","value":2841},{"name":"Boston College Law School","value":245},{"name":"Boston University School of Law","value":247},{"name":"BPP Law School Leeds","value":2642},{"name":"BPP Law School London","value":2782},{"name":"BPP Law School","value":3237},{"name":"BPP University","value":2984},{"name":"Brooklyn Law School","value":2705},{"name":"Bucerius Law School, Germany","value":2898},{"name":"Cairo University, Law School","value":2962},{"name":"California Western School of Law","value":315},{"name":"Capital University Law School","value":327},{"name":"Case Western Reserve University School of Law","value":345},{"name":"Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law","value":2235},{"name":"Chapman University School of Law","value":377},{"name":"Charleston School of Law","value":2910},{"name":"Chicago-Kent College of Law","value":3050},{"name":"City Law School, London","value":2998},{"name":"City Law School","value":2857},{"name":"Clark University","value":3006},{"name":"Cleveland-Marshall College of Law","value":426},{"name":"College of Law, Guildford, UK","value":2646},{"name":"College of Law, London, UK","value":2647},{"name":"Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs","value":3008},{"name":"Columbia University School of Law","value":485},{"name":"Columbia University","value":3126},{"name":"Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America","value":3010},{"name":"Columbus School of Law","value":350},{"name":"Concord Law School of Kaplan University","value":1026},{"name":"Cornell Law School","value":512},{"name":"Creighton University School of Law","value":518},{"name":"Creighton University","value":3025},{"name":"Cumberland School of Law","value":1759},{"name":"CUNY School of Law","value":2893},{"name":"David A. Clarke School of Law","value":2399},{"name":"Deakin University School of Law","value":2907},{"name":"Delhi University","value":3099},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":3060},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":565},{"name":"Dickinson School of Law","value":2719},{"name":"Drake University Law School","value":609},{"name":"Duke University School of Law","value":613},{"name":"Duquesne University School of Law","value":614},{"name":"Durham University","value":2708},{"name":"Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law","value":173},{"name":"Edinburgh Law School","value":3160},{"name":"Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University","value":2936},{"name":"ELTE University Budapest","value":2969},{"name":"Emory University School of Law","value":659},{"name":"ESADE Business and Law School – Universidad Ramon Llull","value":3215},{"name":"Fachseminare von Fürstenberg","value":2918},{"name":"Faculté Libre de Droit, Université Catholique de Lille","value":3055},{"name":"Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb","value":2983},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":3039},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":2944},{"name":"Federal University of Rio de Janeiro","value":3022},{"name":"Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul School of Law (Brazil)","value":3062},{"name":"Florida A\u0026M University College of Law","value":699},{"name":"Florida Coastal School of Law","value":2894},{"name":"Florida International College of Law","value":707},{"name":"Florida State University College of Law","value":720},{"name":"Fordham University School of Law","value":722},{"name":"Franklin Pierce School of Law","value":2259},{"name":"Free University Berlin","value":2903},{"name":"Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena","value":3015},{"name":"Fudan University","value":2986},{"name":"George Mason University School of Law","value":752},{"name":"George Washington University Law School","value":753},{"name":"Georgetown University Law Center","value":755},{"name":"Georgia State University College of Law","value":761},{"name":"Ghent Law School","value":2793},{"name":"Golden Gate University School of Law","value":770},{"name":"Gonzaga University School of Law","value":772},{"name":"Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva","value":2997},{"name":"Guildhall University, London","value":2863},{"name":"Hamline University School of Law","value":811},{"name":"Harvard Law School","value":824},{"name":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law","value":2994},{"name":"Hofstra University School of Law","value":858},{"name":"Howard University School of Law","value":872},{"name":"Huazhong University of Science and Technology","value":3016},{"name":"Humboldt University of Berlin","value":3012},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":2711},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":890},{"name":"Inns of Court School of Law, UK","value":2649},{"name":"International Association of Privacy Professionals","value":3009},{"name":"J. Reuben Clark Law School","value":262},{"name":"Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center","value":2084},{"name":"James Cook University of North Queensland","value":3034},{"name":"Jean Moulin University Lyon 3, France","value":2938},{"name":"Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany","value":2653},{"name":"Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health","value":2992},{"name":"Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Rechtswissenschaft (Germany)","value":3063},{"name":"Kansas City School of Law","value":2247},{"name":"Keio University","value":2968},{"name":"Kent College of Law","value":883},{"name":"King Saud University College of Law \u0026 Political Sciences","value":2823},{"name":"King's College London","value":2987},{"name":"King's College, University of London, UK","value":2654},{"name":"Kline School of Law","value":611},{"name":"KU Leuven","value":3007},{"name":"Leiden University","value":2926},{"name":"Levin College of Law","value":2189},{"name":"Lewis and Clark Law School","value":1089},{"name":"Liberty University School of Law","value":1094},{"name":"Lincoln College of Law","value":2253},{"name":"Liverpool University, UK","value":2657},{"name":"LL.M. in International Crime and Justice UNICRI","value":2937},{"name":"London School of Economics and Political Science, UK","value":2658},{"name":"Loyola Law School","value":2895},{"name":"Loyola University Chicago School of Law","value":1135},{"name":"Loyola University New Orleans College of Law","value":1136},{"name":"Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich","value":3105},{"name":"Lund University","value":3084},{"name":"Marquette University Law School","value":1176},{"name":"McGeorge School of Law","value":2402},{"name":"McGill University","value":2659},{"name":"Melbourne Law School","value":2899},{"name":"Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law","value":1221},{"name":"Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology","value":2996},{"name":"Michael E. Moritz College of Law","value":2728},{"name":"Michigan State University College of Law","value":1245},{"name":"Mississippi College School of Law","value":1285},{"name":"Monash University, Australia","value":2660},{"name":"Monash University, Australia","value":3047},{"name":"Moscow State University","value":2815},{"name":"National and Kapodistrian University of Athens","value":3032},{"name":"National Law University Jodhpur","value":3020},{"name":"National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law","value":2662},{"name":"New England School of Law","value":2886},{"name":"New York Law School","value":1403},{"name":"New York University School of Law","value":1406},{"name":"New York University School of Law","value":2715},{"name":"Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law","value":323},{"name":"North Carolina Central University School of Law","value":1417},{"name":"Northeastern University School of Law","value":1430},{"name":"Northern Illinois University College of Law","value":1432},{"name":"Northwestern Pritzker School of Law","value":1451},{"name":"Notre Dame Law School","value":2278},{"name":"Ohio Northern University Law School","value":3036},{"name":"Oklahoma City University School of Law","value":1487},{"name":"Osgoode Hall Law School","value":3124},{"name":"Oxford University, UK","value":2669},{"name":"Pace University School of Law","value":1516},{"name":"Panteion University","value":3033},{"name":"Paul M. Hebert Law Center","value":2713},{"name":"Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law","value":1562},{"name":"Pepperdine University School of Law","value":1570},{"name":"Pettit College of Law","value":1473},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile","value":3203},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru","value":3011},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Javeriana","value":3013},{"name":"Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo","value":3095},{"name":"Prince Sultan University College of Law","value":3167},{"name":"Queen's University Faculty of Law","value":2801},{"name":"Queens College, Cambridge","value":3003},{"name":"Quinnipiac University School of Law","value":1626},{"name":"Ralph R. Papitto School of Law","value":1686},{"name":"Regent University School of Law","value":1649},{"name":"Rice University","value":3043},{"name":"Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg","value":3049},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law-Newark","value":1699},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law","value":1697},{"name":"S.J. Quinney College of Law","value":2408},{"name":"Saint Louis University School of Law","value":2725},{"name":"Saint Louis University School of Law","value":1732},{"name":"Salmon P. Chase College of Law","value":1433},{"name":"Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law","value":103},{"name":"Santa Clara University School of Law","value":1771},{"name":"Sciences Po Paris","value":2925},{"name":"Seattle University School of Law","value":1787},{"name":"Seton Hall University School of Law","value":1790},{"name":"Shepard Broad Law Center","value":1460},{"name":"South Texas College of Law","value":2721},{"name":"Southern Illinois University School of Law","value":1849},{"name":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law","value":1852},{"name":"Southern University Law Center","value":1857},{"name":"Southwestern Law School","value":1876},{"name":"St. John's University School of Law","value":2724},{"name":"St. Mary's University School of Law","value":1896},{"name":"St. Thomas University School of Law","value":1746},{"name":"Stanford Law School","value":1904},{"name":"Stetson University College of Law","value":1910},{"name":"Sturm College of Law","value":2184},{"name":"Suffolk University Law School","value":1921},{"name":"Syracuse University College of Law","value":1956},{"name":"Temple University Beasley School of Law","value":1974},{"name":"Texas A\u0026M School of Law","value":1980},{"name":"Texas Tech University School of Law","value":1994},{"name":"Texas Wesleyan University School of Law","value":1996},{"name":"The College of Law Australia","value":3091},{"name":"The College of Law, London","value":2935},{"name":"The John Marshall Law School","value":2034},{"name":"The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School","value":2896},{"name":"The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law","value":2990},{"name":"The University of Akron School of Law","value":2143},{"name":"The University of Alabama School of Law","value":2045},{"name":"The University of Birmingham, U.K.","value":2796},{"name":"The University of Iowa College of Law","value":2206},{"name":"The University of Manchester","value":2845},{"name":"The University of Melbourne","value":2836},{"name":"The University of Texas School of Law","value":2055},{"name":"The University of Texas School of Law","value":2752},{"name":"The University of Tulsa College of Law","value":2407},{"name":"Thomas Jefferson School of Law","value":685},{"name":"Thomas M. Cooley Law School","value":2729},{"name":"Thurgood Marshall School of Law","value":1992},{"name":"Tianjin University of Commerce","value":2995},{"name":"Tulane University Law School","value":2113},{"name":"UC Davis School of Law","value":2160},{"name":"UCLA School of Law","value":3168},{"name":"UCLA School of Law","value":2162},{"name":"Universidad Católica de Honduras","value":2916},{"name":"Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá Colombia","value":2677},{"name":"Universidad Francisco Marroquin","value":3090},{"name":"Universidad Iberoamericana","value":2915},{"name":"Universidad Panamericana","value":2904},{"name":"Universidad Torcuato di Tella","value":3035},{"name":"Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Direito","value":3028},{"name":"Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie","value":2977},{"name":"Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi","value":3135},{"name":"Université Catholique de Louvain, Licencie en Droit","value":3213},{"name":"Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium","value":2679},{"name":"Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne","value":2680},{"name":"University at Buffalo Law School","value":1928},{"name":"University College Dublin Law School","value":2900},{"name":"University College London, UK","value":2760},{"name":"University of Alberta Faculty of Law","value":3088},{"name":"University of Amsterdam","value":2980},{"name":"University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law","value":2149},{"name":"University of Arkansas School of Law","value":2154},{"name":"University of Augsburg","value":2779},{"name":"University of Baltimore School of Law","value":2156},{"name":"University of Bonn, Germany","value":2682},{"name":"University of Bristol, UK","value":2761},{"name":"University of Buenos Aires, Argentina","value":2683},{"name":"University of California College of the Law","value":3196},{"name":"University of California Hastings College of Law","value":2158},{"name":"University of California Irvine School of Law","value":2161},{"name":"University of California, Berkeley, School of Law","value":2159},{"name":"University of California, Davis","value":3019},{"name":"University of Cambridge, U.K","value":2991},{"name":"University of Cambridge, UK","value":2684},{"name":"University of Canterbury","value":2981},{"name":"University of Cape Town, South Africa","value":2854},{"name":"University of Central Florida","value":3027},{"name":"University of Chester Law School","value":3005},{"name":"University of Chicago Law School","value":2174},{"name":"University of Chicago","value":3038},{"name":"University of Cincinnati College of Law","value":2175},{"name":"University of Cologne, Germany","value":2885},{"name":"University of Colorado School of Law","value":2177},{"name":"University of Connecticut School of Law","value":2180},{"name":"University of Dayton School of Law","value":2182},{"name":"University of Detroit Mercy School of Law","value":2185},{"name":"University of Deusto, Spain","value":2685},{"name":"University of East Anglia","value":3000},{"name":"University of East London","value":2963},{"name":"University of Exeter, UK","value":2770},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3112},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3188},{"name":"University of Georgia School of Law","value":2190},{"name":"University of Hamburg, Germany","value":2688},{"name":"University of Houston Law Center","value":2197},{"name":"University of Hull","value":3040},{"name":"University of Idaho College of Law","value":2201},{"name":"University of Illinois at Chicago School of Law","value":2202},{"name":"University of Illinois College of Law","value":2204},{"name":"University of Kansas School of Law","value":2208},{"name":"University of Kent at Canterbury, UK","value":2690},{"name":"University of Kent","value":2849},{"name":"University of Kentucky College of Law","value":2210},{"name":"University of La Verne College of Law","value":2211},{"name":"University of Law, London","value":2999},{"name":"University of Law","value":2954},{"name":"University of Leeds School of Law","value":2850},{"name":"University of Lethbridge","value":3030},{"name":"University of Lima","value":2859},{"name":"University of London","value":2692},{"name":"University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law","value":2214},{"name":"University of Maine School of Law","value":2391},{"name":"University of Maryland School of Law","value":2224},{"name":"University of Maryland School of Law","value":2739},{"name":"University of Miami School of Law","value":2236},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":2237},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":3064},{"name":"University of Minnesota Law School","value":2243},{"name":"University of Mississippi School of Law","value":2244},{"name":"University of Missouri School of Law","value":2246},{"name":"University of Montana School of Law","value":2048},{"name":"University of Nebraska College of Law","value":2744},{"name":"University of New Mexico School of Law","value":2262},{"name":"University of New South Wales","value":2871},{"name":"University of North Carolina School of Law","value":2266},{"name":"University of North Dakota School of Law","value":2271},{"name":"University of Nottingham, England","value":2881},{"name":"University of Oklahoma Law Center","value":2747},{"name":"University of Oregon School of Law","value":2281},{"name":"University of Otago, New Zealand","value":2694},{"name":"University of Paris II, Pantheon-Assas, France","value":2695},{"name":"University of Paris, Pantheon Sorbonne","value":3190},{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law School","value":2282},{"name":"University of Pittsburgh School of Law","value":2354},{"name":"University of Richmond School of Law","value":2370},{"name":"University of San Diego School of Law","value":2377},{"name":"University of San Francisco School of Law","value":2378},{"name":"University of Sheffield","value":2805},{"name":"University of South Carolina School of Law","value":2750},{"name":"University of South Dakota School of Law","value":2387},{"name":"University of Southern California Gould School of Law","value":3051},{"name":"University of St. Thomas School of Law","value":2751},{"name":"University of Sydney Law School","value":3031},{"name":"University of Sydney, Australia","value":2700},{"name":"University of Tasmania","value":2835},{"name":"University of Tennessee College of Law","value":2051},{"name":"University of the West of England, Bristol","value":3001},{"name":"University of Tokyo","value":3153},{"name":"University of Toledo College of Law","value":2406},{"name":"University of Toronto","value":2912},{"name":"University of Turku","value":3083},{"name":"University of Utah","value":3026},{"name":"University of Vienna School of Law","value":2701},{"name":"University of Virginia School of Law","value":2410},{"name":"University of Warwick, UK","value":2771},{"name":"University of Washington School of Law","value":2412},{"name":"University of Western Australia","value":2949},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2419},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2755},{"name":"University of Wollongong, Australia","value":2873},{"name":"University of Wyoming College of Law","value":2429},{"name":"University of Zürich","value":3037},{"name":"University Paris Dauphine","value":2976},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":2975},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":3052},{"name":"University Toulouse Capitol","value":3109},{"name":"USC Gould School of Law","value":2389},{"name":"Utrecht University","value":3085},{"name":"Valparaiso University School of Law","value":2441},{"name":"Vanderbilt University School of Law","value":2442},{"name":"Vermont Law School","value":2451},{"name":"Villanova University School of Law","value":2454},{"name":"Wake Forest University School of Law","value":2471},{"name":"Washburn University School of Law","value":2482},{"name":"Washington and Lee University School of Law","value":2484},{"name":"Washington College of Law","value":61},{"name":"Washington University in St. Louis School of Law","value":2489},{"name":"Wayne State University Law School","value":2493},{"name":"West Virginia University College of Law","value":2517},{"name":"Western New England College School of Law","value":2528},{"name":"Western State College of Law","value":2897},{"name":"Wharton School of Business","value":3044},{"name":"Whittier Law School","value":2564},{"name":"Widener University Delaware Law School","value":2569},{"name":"Willamette University College of Law","value":2573},{"name":"William \u0026 Mary Law School","value":462},{"name":"William H. Bowen School of Law","value":2150},{"name":"William Mitchell College of Law","value":2758},{"name":"William S. Boyd School of Law","value":2256},{"name":"William S. Richardson School of Law","value":2195},{"name":"Wilmington University","value":2993},{"name":"Yale Law School","value":2605}],"offices":[{"name":"Abu Dhabi","value":13},{"name":"Atlanta","value":1},{"name":"Austin","value":12},{"name":"Brussels","value":23},{"name":"Charlotte","value":8},{"name":"Chicago","value":21},{"name":"Dallas","value":28},{"name":"Denver","value":22},{"name":"Dubai","value":6},{"name":"Frankfurt","value":9},{"name":"Geneva","value":15},{"name":"Houston","value":4},{"name":"London","value":5},{"name":"Los Angeles","value":19},{"name":"Miami","value":25},{"name":"New York","value":3},{"name":"Northern Virginia","value":24},{"name":"Paris","value":14},{"name":"Riyadh","value":27},{"name":"Sacramento","value":20},{"name":"San Francisco","value":10},{"name":"Silicon Valley","value":11},{"name":"Singapore","value":16},{"name":"Sydney","value":26},{"name":"Tokyo","value":18},{"name":"Washington, D.C.","value":2}],"capabilities":[{"name":"Corporate, Finance and Investments","value":"cg-1"},{"name":null,"value":72},{"name":null,"value":26},{"name":null,"value":40},{"name":null,"value":27},{"name":null,"value":80},{"name":null,"value":28},{"name":null,"value":35},{"name":null,"value":10},{"name":null,"value":134},{"name":null,"value":121},{"name":null,"value":78},{"name":null,"value":29},{"name":null,"value":32},{"name":null,"value":31},{"name":null,"value":33},{"name":null,"value":126},{"name":null,"value":36},{"name":null,"value":82},{"name":null,"value":37},{"name":null,"value":115},{"name":"Government Matters","value":"cg-2"},{"name":null,"value":1},{"name":null,"value":6},{"name":null,"value":71},{"name":null,"value":21},{"name":null,"value":23},{"name":null,"value":116},{"name":null,"value":24},{"name":null,"value":135},{"name":null,"value":25},{"name":null,"value":110},{"name":null,"value":20},{"name":null,"value":11},{"name":"Trial and Global Disputes","value":"cg-3"},{"name":null,"value":129},{"name":null,"value":2},{"name":null,"value":38},{"name":null,"value":3},{"name":null,"value":5},{"name":null,"value":19},{"name":null,"value":7},{"name":null,"value":4},{"name":null,"value":136},{"name":null,"value":13},{"name":null,"value":14},{"name":null,"value":15},{"name":null,"value":17},{"name":null,"value":18},{"name":null,"value":16},{"name":"Industries / Issues","value":"cg-4"},{"name":null,"value":133},{"name":null,"value":106},{"name":null,"value":124},{"name":null,"value":111},{"name":null,"value":132},{"name":null,"value":131},{"name":null,"value":102},{"name":null,"value":125},{"name":null,"value":127},{"name":null,"value":107},{"name":null,"value":112},{"name":null,"value":105},{"name":null,"value":109},{"name":null,"value":103},{"name":null,"value":128},{"name":null,"value":123},{"name":null,"value":118}]},"title_id":null,"school_id":null,"office_id":null,"capability_id":"13","extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"K","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":451191,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7479,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRachael Kent helps clients navigate high‑stakes international disputes, leading teams in complex commercial and investment arbitrations across industries and jurisdictions. She guides clients through every stage of the dispute process, delivering pragmatic strategy and tenacious advocacy to resolve disputes and protect critical business and investment interests.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of experience, Rachael advises companies, investors, and sovereign entities on high‑stakes commercial and investment disputes worldwide. She has represented clients in complex arbitrations under the rules of all major arbitral institutions, including the ICC, ICSID, AAA/ICDR, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, VIAC, and WIPO.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRachael steers clients through all stages of the dispute process, formulating strategy, navigating complex procedural issues, and delivering strong advocacy to protect critical investments and commercial interests. She has been described by clients and peers as \u0026ldquo;one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,\u0026rdquo; with \u0026ldquo;impeccable judgment and strategic acumen.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer matters involve disputes with significant financial exposure and technical complexity, often arising from long‑term contracts, collaboration and joint venture agreements, and agreements involving intellectual property rights. Rachael has particular experience representing life sciences and technology companies in high-value arbitrations arising under joint venture, co-development, and IP license agreements. She also works closely with clients in sectors such as energy, aerospace, and construction, where disputes frequently combine legal, technical, and commercial considerations. She distills complex issues into practical guidance, helping clients achieve their commercial objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"rachael-kent","email":"rkent@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore arising under a license agreement, with claims and counterclaims exceeding $500 million in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global clean energy company in an ICC arbitration seated in California involving warranty claims under a supply agreement for a critical component in an energy storage product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a UK investor in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the People\u0026rsquo;s Republic of China arising out of the expropriation of land use rights and unfair treatment of the claimant\u0026rsquo;s investment and in related enforcement proceedings to confirm the favorable award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in London, using expedited procedures, arising out of a joint venture agreement and IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global energy services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris related to disputes under contracts for oil drilling services.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global consumer technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement for standard essential patents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Ministry of Public Works of a Middle Eastern state in a SIAC arbitration seated in Singapore arising out of a $400 million construction project in the transportation sector.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an investment arbitration against a Latin American state involving claims for denial of justice arising from a national court judgment and in related set-aside proceedings, which confirmed the favorable award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an aerospace and defense technology company in a dispute under a long-term development and supply agreement related to the supply of military aircraft.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global medical device company in a AAA arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major consumer health products company in a JAMS arbitration seated in Chicago arising under an IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York arising out of an IP license agreement and involving claims related to licensed patents and know-how.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a state party in an LCIA arbitration seated in London involving disputes related to the development of a substantial oil and gas field and the construction of gas processing facilities, with more than $30 billion in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global technology company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York involving disputes under a patent license agreement related to the semiconductor industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in a WIPO arbitration seated in Switzerland arising under an IP license agreement and involving claims with a value exceeding $2 billion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading global retail company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong arising out of the acquisition of a subsidiary in China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading defense technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in Brussels involving disputes under a software development agreement related to a military aircraft program.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading mining company in an ICSID arbitration against an Asian state involving claims related to violation of a stabilization clause.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major global manufacturing company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong involving disputes arising out of the acquisition of a computer business in Taiwan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading financial services company in multiple ad hoc arbitrations seated in Bermuda under excess coverage professional liability insurance policies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major US financial services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris arising out of an M\u0026amp;A agreement, with claims for breach of representations and warranties and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major global manufacturing company in an ICC arbitration seated in Zurich involving disputes related to a services contract for the design of consumer electronics products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major European telecommunications company in multiple VIAC arbitrations seated in Vienna involving the ownership of an Eastern European joint venture company.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kent","nick_name":"Rachael","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Rachael","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":613,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1998-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"D.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked for Arbitration (International), Global Market Leaders","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"Ranked for International Arbitration. Sources report that she is “a world-class lawyer and advocate” and “one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,” with “impeccable judgment and strategic acumen” and “a uniquely measured and diplomatic style that is exceptionally persuasive.” ","detail":"Chambers USA, 2012 – 2026"},{"title":"Recommended as a Leading Partner for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 United States"},{"title":"Selected for recognition as a leading arbitration practitioner in the 2017–2026 editions of Lexology Index: Arbitration, including in the inaugural edition of Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders 2017—a guide profiling the foremost practitioners in the arbitration community. Sources report that she is a “highly reputable” and “amazingly able” lawyer and “established leader” in international arbitration, “strongly recommended” for her excellence in complex commercial and investment disputes","detail":"Lexology Index: Arbitration and Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders"},{"title":"Named a Washington, D.C. Lawyer of the Year for her international arbitration practice","detail":"Best Lawyers in America, 2023"},{"title":"Consistently recognized as a “Litigation Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRachael Kent helps clients navigate high‑stakes international disputes, leading teams in complex commercial and investment arbitrations across industries and jurisdictions. She guides clients through every stage of the dispute process, delivering pragmatic strategy and tenacious advocacy to resolve disputes and protect critical business and investment interests.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of experience, Rachael advises companies, investors, and sovereign entities on high‑stakes commercial and investment disputes worldwide. She has represented clients in complex arbitrations under the rules of all major arbitral institutions, including the ICC, ICSID, AAA/ICDR, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, VIAC, and WIPO.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRachael steers clients through all stages of the dispute process, formulating strategy, navigating complex procedural issues, and delivering strong advocacy to protect critical investments and commercial interests. She has been described by clients and peers as \u0026ldquo;one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,\u0026rdquo; with \u0026ldquo;impeccable judgment and strategic acumen.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer matters involve disputes with significant financial exposure and technical complexity, often arising from long‑term contracts, collaboration and joint venture agreements, and agreements involving intellectual property rights. Rachael has particular experience representing life sciences and technology companies in high-value arbitrations arising under joint venture, co-development, and IP license agreements. She also works closely with clients in sectors such as energy, aerospace, and construction, where disputes frequently combine legal, technical, and commercial considerations. She distills complex issues into practical guidance, helping clients achieve their commercial objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore arising under a license agreement, with claims and counterclaims exceeding $500 million in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global clean energy company in an ICC arbitration seated in California involving warranty claims under a supply agreement for a critical component in an energy storage product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a UK investor in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the People\u0026rsquo;s Republic of China arising out of the expropriation of land use rights and unfair treatment of the claimant\u0026rsquo;s investment and in related enforcement proceedings to confirm the favorable award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in London, using expedited procedures, arising out of a joint venture agreement and IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global energy services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris related to disputes under contracts for oil drilling services.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global consumer technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement for standard essential patents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Ministry of Public Works of a Middle Eastern state in a SIAC arbitration seated in Singapore arising out of a $400 million construction project in the transportation sector.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an investment arbitration against a Latin American state involving claims for denial of justice arising from a national court judgment and in related set-aside proceedings, which confirmed the favorable award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an aerospace and defense technology company in a dispute under a long-term development and supply agreement related to the supply of military aircraft.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global medical device company in a AAA arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major consumer health products company in a JAMS arbitration seated in Chicago arising under an IP license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York arising out of an IP license agreement and involving claims related to licensed patents and know-how.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a state party in an LCIA arbitration seated in London involving disputes related to the development of a substantial oil and gas field and the construction of gas processing facilities, with more than $30 billion in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global technology company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York involving disputes under a patent license agreement related to the semiconductor industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in a WIPO arbitration seated in Switzerland arising under an IP license agreement and involving claims with a value exceeding $2 billion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading global retail company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong arising out of the acquisition of a subsidiary in China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading defense technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in Brussels involving disputes under a software development agreement related to a military aircraft program.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading mining company in an ICSID arbitration against an Asian state involving claims related to violation of a stabilization clause.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major global manufacturing company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong involving disputes arising out of the acquisition of a computer business in Taiwan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a leading financial services company in multiple ad hoc arbitrations seated in Bermuda under excess coverage professional liability insurance policies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major US financial services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris arising out of an M\u0026amp;A agreement, with claims for breach of representations and warranties and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major global manufacturing company in an ICC arbitration seated in Zurich involving disputes related to a services contract for the design of consumer electronics products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a major European telecommunications company in multiple VIAC arbitrations seated in Vienna involving the ownership of an Eastern European joint venture company.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked for Arbitration (International), Global Market Leaders","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"Ranked for International Arbitration. Sources report that she is “a world-class lawyer and advocate” and “one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,” with “impeccable judgment and strategic acumen” and “a uniquely measured and diplomatic style that is exceptionally persuasive.” ","detail":"Chambers USA, 2012 – 2026"},{"title":"Recommended as a Leading Partner for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 United States"},{"title":"Selected for recognition as a leading arbitration practitioner in the 2017–2026 editions of Lexology Index: Arbitration, including in the inaugural edition of Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders 2017—a guide profiling the foremost practitioners in the arbitration community. Sources report that she is a “highly reputable” and “amazingly able” lawyer and “established leader” in international arbitration, “strongly recommended” for her excellence in complex commercial and investment disputes","detail":"Lexology Index: Arbitration and Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders"},{"title":"Named a Washington, D.C. Lawyer of the Year for her international arbitration practice","detail":"Best Lawyers in America, 2023"},{"title":"Consistently recognized as a “Litigation Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13551}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-06-17T15:20:06.000Z","updated_at":"2026-06-17T15:20:06.000Z","searchable_text":"Kent{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked for Arbitration (International), Global Market Leaders\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked for International Arbitration. Sources report that she is “a world-class lawyer and advocate” and “one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,” with “impeccable judgment and strategic acumen” and “a uniquely measured and diplomatic style that is exceptionally persuasive.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2012 – 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended as a Leading Partner for International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 United States\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected for recognition as a leading arbitration practitioner in the 2017–2026 editions of Lexology Index: Arbitration, including in the inaugural edition of Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders 2017—a guide profiling the foremost practitioners in the arbitration community. Sources report that she is a “highly reputable” and “amazingly able” lawyer and “established leader” in international arbitration, “strongly recommended” for her excellence in complex commercial and investment disputes\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lexology Index: Arbitration and Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Washington, D.C. Lawyer of the Year for her international arbitration practice\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Consistently recognized as a “Litigation Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation\"}{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore arising under a license agreement, with claims and counterclaims exceeding $500 million in dispute.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global clean energy company in an ICC arbitration seated in California involving warranty claims under a supply agreement for a critical component in an energy storage product.{{ FIELD }}Represented a UK investor in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the People’s Republic of China arising out of the expropriation of land use rights and unfair treatment of the claimant’s investment and in related enforcement proceedings to confirm the favorable award.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in London, using expedited procedures, arising out of a joint venture agreement and IP license agreement.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global energy services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris related to disputes under contracts for oil drilling services.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global consumer technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement for standard essential patents.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Ministry of Public Works of a Middle Eastern state in a SIAC arbitration seated in Singapore arising out of a $400 million construction project in the transportation sector.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an investment arbitration against a Latin American state involving claims for denial of justice arising from a national court judgment and in related set-aside proceedings, which confirmed the favorable award.{{ FIELD }}Represented an aerospace and defense technology company in a dispute under a long-term development and supply agreement related to the supply of military aircraft.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global medical device company in a AAA arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major consumer health products company in a JAMS arbitration seated in Chicago arising under an IP license agreement.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York arising out of an IP license agreement and involving claims related to licensed patents and know-how.{{ FIELD }}Represented a state party in an LCIA arbitration seated in London involving disputes related to the development of a substantial oil and gas field and the construction of gas processing facilities, with more than $30 billion in dispute.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global technology company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York involving disputes under a patent license agreement related to the semiconductor industry.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in a WIPO arbitration seated in Switzerland arising under an IP license agreement and involving claims with a value exceeding $2 billion.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading global retail company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong arising out of the acquisition of a subsidiary in China.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading defense technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in Brussels involving disputes under a software development agreement related to a military aircraft program.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading mining company in an ICSID arbitration against an Asian state involving claims related to violation of a stabilization clause.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major global manufacturing company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong involving disputes arising out of the acquisition of a computer business in Taiwan.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading financial services company in multiple ad hoc arbitrations seated in Bermuda under excess coverage professional liability insurance policies.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major US financial services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris arising out of an M\u0026amp;A agreement, with claims for breach of representations and warranties and fraud.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major global manufacturing company in an ICC arbitration seated in Zurich involving disputes related to a services contract for the design of consumer electronics products.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major European telecommunications company in multiple VIAC arbitrations seated in Vienna involving the ownership of an Eastern European joint venture company.{{ FIELD }}Rachael Kent helps clients navigate high‑stakes international disputes, leading teams in complex commercial and investment arbitrations across industries and jurisdictions. She guides clients through every stage of the dispute process, delivering pragmatic strategy and tenacious advocacy to resolve disputes and protect critical business and investment interests.\nWith more than 25 years of experience, Rachael advises companies, investors, and sovereign entities on high‑stakes commercial and investment disputes worldwide. She has represented clients in complex arbitrations under the rules of all major arbitral institutions, including the ICC, ICSID, AAA/ICDR, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, VIAC, and WIPO. \nRachael steers clients through all stages of the dispute process, formulating strategy, navigating complex procedural issues, and delivering strong advocacy to protect critical investments and commercial interests. She has been described by clients and peers as “one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,” with “impeccable judgment and strategic acumen.”\nHer matters involve disputes with significant financial exposure and technical complexity, often arising from long‑term contracts, collaboration and joint venture agreements, and agreements involving intellectual property rights. Rachael has particular experience representing life sciences and technology companies in high-value arbitrations arising under joint venture, co-development, and IP license agreements. She also works closely with clients in sectors such as energy, aerospace, and construction, where disputes frequently combine legal, technical, and commercial considerations. She distills complex issues into practical guidance, helping clients achieve their commercial objectives.\n  Partner Ranked for Arbitration (International), Global Market Leaders Chambers Global Ranked for International Arbitration. Sources report that she is “a world-class lawyer and advocate” and “one of the best arbitration advocates in international arbitration worldwide,” with “impeccable judgment and strategic acumen” and “a uniquely measured and diplomatic style that is exceptionally persuasive.”  Chambers USA, 2012 – 2026 Recommended as a Leading Partner for International Arbitration Legal 500 United States Selected for recognition as a leading arbitration practitioner in the 2017–2026 editions of Lexology Index: Arbitration, including in the inaugural edition of Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders 2017—a guide profiling the foremost practitioners in the arbitration community. Sources report that she is a “highly reputable” and “amazingly able” lawyer and “established leader” in international arbitration, “strongly recommended” for her excellence in complex commercial and investment disputes Lexology Index: Arbitration and Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration - Future Leaders Named a Washington, D.C. Lawyer of the Year for her international arbitration practice Best Lawyers in America, 2023 Consistently recognized as a “Litigation Star” Benchmark Litigation Georgetown University  Duke University Duke University School of Law District of Columbia Maryland England and Wales (Registered Foreign Lawyer) Institute for Transnational Arbitration, Senior Vice Chair WIPO Mediation and Arbitration Advisory Committee Taught courses on international arbitration at the Georgetown University Law Center, the Duke University School of Law, the University of Michigan Law School, and Pepperdine Law School Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore arising under a license agreement, with claims and counterclaims exceeding $500 million in dispute. Represented a global clean energy company in an ICC arbitration seated in California involving warranty claims under a supply agreement for a critical component in an energy storage product. Represented a UK investor in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the People’s Republic of China arising out of the expropriation of land use rights and unfair treatment of the claimant’s investment and in related enforcement proceedings to confirm the favorable award. Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration seated in London, using expedited procedures, arising out of a joint venture agreement and IP license agreement. Represented a global energy services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris related to disputes under contracts for oil drilling services. Represented a global consumer technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement for standard essential patents. Represented the Ministry of Public Works of a Middle Eastern state in a SIAC arbitration seated in Singapore arising out of a $400 million construction project in the transportation sector. Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an investment arbitration against a Latin American state involving claims for denial of justice arising from a national court judgment and in related set-aside proceedings, which confirmed the favorable award. Represented an aerospace and defense technology company in a dispute under a long-term development and supply agreement related to the supply of military aircraft. Represented a global medical device company in a AAA arbitration seated in New York arising under an IP license agreement. Represented a major consumer health products company in a JAMS arbitration seated in Chicago arising under an IP license agreement. Represented a global pharmaceutical company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York arising out of an IP license agreement and involving claims related to licensed patents and know-how. Represented a state party in an LCIA arbitration seated in London involving disputes related to the development of a substantial oil and gas field and the construction of gas processing facilities, with more than $30 billion in dispute. Represented a global technology company in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York involving disputes under a patent license agreement related to the semiconductor industry. Represented a global pharmaceutical company in a WIPO arbitration seated in Switzerland arising under an IP license agreement and involving claims with a value exceeding $2 billion. Represented a leading global retail company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong arising out of the acquisition of a subsidiary in China. Represented a leading defense technology company in an ICC arbitration seated in Brussels involving disputes under a software development agreement related to a military aircraft program. Represented a leading mining company in an ICSID arbitration against an Asian state involving claims related to violation of a stabilization clause. Represented a major global manufacturing company in an HKIAC arbitration seated in Hong Kong involving disputes arising out of the acquisition of a computer business in Taiwan. Represented a leading financial services company in multiple ad hoc arbitrations seated in Bermuda under excess coverage professional liability insurance policies. Represented a major US financial services company in an ICC arbitration seated in Paris arising out of an M\u0026amp;A agreement, with claims for breach of representations and warranties and fraud. Represented a major global manufacturing company in an ICC arbitration seated in Zurich involving disputes related to a services contract for the design of consumer electronics products. Represented a major European telecommunications company in multiple VIAC arbitrations seated in Vienna involving the ownership of an Eastern European joint venture company.","searchable_name":"Rachael D. Kent","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":451111,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7480,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMarleen Krueger advises clients on international commercial and investment arbitration across jurisdictions and industries. She acts as counsel and arbitrator in proceedings seated in both civil and common law forums worldwide, including Germany, England, France, New York, Peru, South Korea, Japan, and Switzerland. Marleen represents private and government clients across sectors, including energy, oil and gas, pharmaceuticals, construction, intellectual property, technology, and automotive.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen regularly works with both private companies and state‑owned entities and is well positioned to handle sensitive, cross‑border matters. Her ability to operate across legal systems and coordinate international teams enables clients to manage multi‑forum disputes with consistency and control.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen has advised clients in arbitrations conducted under a variety of arbitral rules, including ICC, LCIA, DIS, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy combining deep experience in arbitration with sector knowledge across energy, construction, technology, and life sciences, Marleen helps clients anticipate challenges, mitigate exposure, and protect critical assets. She brings a practical, solutions‑driven approach to complex disputes, keeping matters focused on outcomes that support broader business objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen is a regular guest lecturer on international arbitration at institutions in Europe and the United States, including the University of W\u0026uuml;rzburg, SOAS University of London, and Pepperdine University.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"marleen-krueger","email":"mkrueger@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Middle Eastern state entity in a consolidated LCIA dispute against a UK-domiciled international energy company relating to the termination of two Production Sharing Contracts in the Middle Eastern state of our client. Seated in London, subject to English law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a multinational plant and equipment supplier for the energy and construction industry in an ICC arbitration relating to a delayed hydropower project in Peru. Seated in Lima, subject to Peruvian law. The tribunal issued an award in favor of our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Southeast Asian state-owned oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration against another Southeast Asian oil and gas company relating to taxation and abandonment obligations arising from a Production Sharing Contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the German branch of a global oil and gas service company in two DIS arbitrations and set-aside proceedings against an oil and gas storage company relating to alleged defects in subsurface equipment. Seated in Hanover, subject to German law. The dispute was settled on terms favorable to our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a global biotechnology company in an ICC arbitration arising out of a joint venture with a Korean company.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Krueger","nick_name":"Marleen","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Marleen","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Highlighted as a “Next Generation Partner” for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized","detail":"Legal Business “The Next Generation of Arbitration”, 2022"},{"title":"Named on the Global Leading Litigators list","detail":"Lawdragon 500, 2024 – 2026 (recognizes lawyers who specialize in international arbitration, public international litigation and global controversies)"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/marleen-krueger-45a7b39a/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMarleen Krueger advises clients on international commercial and investment arbitration across jurisdictions and industries. She acts as counsel and arbitrator in proceedings seated in both civil and common law forums worldwide, including Germany, England, France, New York, Peru, South Korea, Japan, and Switzerland. Marleen represents private and government clients across sectors, including energy, oil and gas, pharmaceuticals, construction, intellectual property, technology, and automotive.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen regularly works with both private companies and state‑owned entities and is well positioned to handle sensitive, cross‑border matters. Her ability to operate across legal systems and coordinate international teams enables clients to manage multi‑forum disputes with consistency and control.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen has advised clients in arbitrations conducted under a variety of arbitral rules, including ICC, LCIA, DIS, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy combining deep experience in arbitration with sector knowledge across energy, construction, technology, and life sciences, Marleen helps clients anticipate challenges, mitigate exposure, and protect critical assets. She brings a practical, solutions‑driven approach to complex disputes, keeping matters focused on outcomes that support broader business objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarleen is a regular guest lecturer on international arbitration at institutions in Europe and the United States, including the University of W\u0026uuml;rzburg, SOAS University of London, and Pepperdine University.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Middle Eastern state entity in a consolidated LCIA dispute against a UK-domiciled international energy company relating to the termination of two Production Sharing Contracts in the Middle Eastern state of our client. Seated in London, subject to English law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a multinational plant and equipment supplier for the energy and construction industry in an ICC arbitration relating to a delayed hydropower project in Peru. Seated in Lima, subject to Peruvian law. The tribunal issued an award in favor of our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Southeast Asian state-owned oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration against another Southeast Asian oil and gas company relating to taxation and abandonment obligations arising from a Production Sharing Contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the German branch of a global oil and gas service company in two DIS arbitrations and set-aside proceedings against an oil and gas storage company relating to alleged defects in subsurface equipment. Seated in Hanover, subject to German law. The dispute was settled on terms favorable to our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a global biotechnology company in an ICC arbitration arising out of a joint venture with a Korean company.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Highlighted as a “Next Generation Partner” for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized","detail":"Legal Business “The Next Generation of Arbitration”, 2022"},{"title":"Named on the Global Leading Litigators list","detail":"Lawdragon 500, 2024 – 2026 (recognizes lawyers who specialize in international arbitration, public international litigation and global controversies)"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13546}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-06-15T11:06:09.000Z","updated_at":"2026-06-15T11:06:09.000Z","searchable_text":"Krueger{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Highlighted as a “Next Generation Partner” for International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal Business “The Next Generation of Arbitration”, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named on the Global Leading Litigators list\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon 500, 2024 – 2026 (recognizes lawyers who specialize in international arbitration, public international litigation and global controversies)\"}{{ FIELD }}Represented a Middle Eastern state entity in a consolidated LCIA dispute against a UK-domiciled international energy company relating to the termination of two Production Sharing Contracts in the Middle Eastern state of our client. Seated in London, subject to English law.{{ FIELD }}Represented a multinational plant and equipment supplier for the energy and construction industry in an ICC arbitration relating to a delayed hydropower project in Peru. Seated in Lima, subject to Peruvian law. The tribunal issued an award in favor of our client.{{ FIELD }}Represented a Southeast Asian state-owned oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration against another Southeast Asian oil and gas company relating to taxation and abandonment obligations arising from a Production Sharing Contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented the German branch of a global oil and gas service company in two DIS arbitrations and set-aside proceedings against an oil and gas storage company relating to alleged defects in subsurface equipment. Seated in Hanover, subject to German law. The dispute was settled on terms favorable to our client.{{ FIELD }}Representing a global biotechnology company in an ICC arbitration arising out of a joint venture with a Korean company.{{ FIELD }}Marleen Krueger advises clients on international commercial and investment arbitration across jurisdictions and industries. She acts as counsel and arbitrator in proceedings seated in both civil and common law forums worldwide, including Germany, England, France, New York, Peru, South Korea, Japan, and Switzerland. Marleen represents private and government clients across sectors, including energy, oil and gas, pharmaceuticals, construction, intellectual property, technology, and automotive.\nMarleen regularly works with both private companies and state‑owned entities and is well positioned to handle sensitive, cross‑border matters. Her ability to operate across legal systems and coordinate international teams enables clients to manage multi‑forum disputes with consistency and control.\nMarleen has advised clients in arbitrations conducted under a variety of arbitral rules, including ICC, LCIA, DIS, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.\nBy combining deep experience in arbitration with sector knowledge across energy, construction, technology, and life sciences, Marleen helps clients anticipate challenges, mitigate exposure, and protect critical assets. She brings a practical, solutions‑driven approach to complex disputes, keeping matters focused on outcomes that support broader business objectives.\nMarleen is a regular guest lecturer on international arbitration at institutions in Europe and the United States, including the University of Würzburg, SOAS University of London, and Pepperdine University. Partner Highlighted as a “Next Generation Partner” for International Arbitration Legal 500 UK, 2026 Recognized Legal Business “The Next Generation of Arbitration”, 2022 Named on the Global Leading Litigators list Lawdragon 500, 2024 – 2026 (recognizes lawyers who specialize in international arbitration, public international litigation and global controversies) Humboldt University of Berlin Humboldt University of Berlin Humboldt University of Berlin Humboldt University of Berlin Court of Berlin  Germany England and Wales (Registered European Lawyer) Represented a Middle Eastern state entity in a consolidated LCIA dispute against a UK-domiciled international energy company relating to the termination of two Production Sharing Contracts in the Middle Eastern state of our client. Seated in London, subject to English law. Represented a multinational plant and equipment supplier for the energy and construction industry in an ICC arbitration relating to a delayed hydropower project in Peru. Seated in Lima, subject to Peruvian law. The tribunal issued an award in favor of our client. Represented a Southeast Asian state-owned oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration against another Southeast Asian oil and gas company relating to taxation and abandonment obligations arising from a Production Sharing Contract. Represented the German branch of a global oil and gas service company in two DIS arbitrations and set-aside proceedings against an oil and gas storage company relating to alleged defects in subsurface equipment. Seated in Hanover, subject to German law. The dispute was settled on terms favorable to our client. Representing a global biotechnology company in an ICC arbitration arising out of a joint venture with a Korean company.","searchable_name":"Marleen Krueger","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":448731,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5488,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"dara-kurlancheek","email":"dkurlancheek@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ebuySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google against buySAFE\u0026rsquo;s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC \u0026sect; 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm; font-style: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eUS Airways Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Media Temple\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1202,"guid":"1202.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1240,"guid":"1240.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kurlancheek","nick_name":"Dara","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Dara","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":734,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2008-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ebuySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google against buySAFE\u0026rsquo;s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC \u0026sect; 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm; font-style: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eUS Airways Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Media Temple\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10852}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-05-28T21:58:16.000Z","updated_at":"2026-05-28T21:58:16.000Z","searchable_text":"Kurlancheek{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019\"}{{ FIELD }}Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.{{ FIELD }}EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.{{ FIELD }}NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.{{ FIELD }}Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.{{ FIELD }}St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.{{ FIELD }}Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.{{ FIELD }}buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).{{ FIELD }}Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. et al. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.{{ FIELD }}Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.{{ FIELD }}Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Aeritas LLC v. US Airways. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).{{ FIELD }}Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).{{ FIELD }}Dara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.\nThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\nShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\nDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business. Partner Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star” Super Lawyers, 2015-2019 Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Patent and Trademark Office U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas District of Columbia New York Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team. EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology. NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc. Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages. St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction. Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems. buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. et al. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds. Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client. Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013). Aeritas LLC v. US Airways. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011). Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013). Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).","searchable_name":"Dara M. Kurlancheek","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":448482,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7317,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJames uses his Electrical Engineering degree to focus his practice on complex patent litigation. James has represented numerous Fortune 500 companies in the Eastern, Western, and Southern Districts of Texas and the District of Delaware in litigation involving DRAM, image processing, data servers, microprocessors, and power electronics.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJames is experienced in conducting technical fact witness interviews, drafting various motions and contentions, and navigating discovery requests, responses, and disputes. James has also drafted petitions for \u003cem\u003einter partes\u003c/em\u003e review. Before joining the firm, James was employed by a global semiconductor and computer company, where he advised on patent strategy, including drafting and prosecuting hardware and software patents.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"james-kappos","email":"jkappos@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 949 307 2614","matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":4981}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":763,"guid":"763.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kappos","nick_name":"James","clerkships":[],"first_name":"James","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2024-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":2,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJames uses his Electrical Engineering degree to focus his practice on complex patent litigation. James has represented numerous Fortune 500 companies in the Eastern, Western, and Southern Districts of Texas and the District of Delaware in litigation involving DRAM, image processing, data servers, microprocessors, and power electronics.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJames is experienced in conducting technical fact witness interviews, drafting various motions and contentions, and navigating discovery requests, responses, and disputes. James has also drafted petitions for \u003cem\u003einter partes\u003c/em\u003e review. Before joining the firm, James was employed by a global semiconductor and computer company, where he advised on patent strategy, including drafting and prosecuting hardware and software patents.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13415}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-05-27T15:01:28.000Z","updated_at":"2026-05-27T15:01:28.000Z","searchable_text":"Kappos{{ FIELD }}James uses his Electrical Engineering degree to focus his practice on complex patent litigation. James has represented numerous Fortune 500 companies in the Eastern, Western, and Southern Districts of Texas and the District of Delaware in litigation involving DRAM, image processing, data servers, microprocessors, and power electronics.\nJames is experienced in conducting technical fact witness interviews, drafting various motions and contentions, and navigating discovery requests, responses, and disputes. James has also drafted petitions for inter partes review. Before joining the firm, James was employed by a global semiconductor and computer company, where he advised on patent strategy, including drafting and prosecuting hardware and software patents. James Kappos lawyer Associate Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University School of Law Harvard University Harvard Law School U.S. Patent and Trademark Office U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Harvard Club of Dallas Harvard Law School Texas Club","searchable_name":"James Kappos","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":433003,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6528,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMK Kennedy helps clients with complex litigation and intellectual property matters. She strives to utilize her experience and knowledge of intellectual property\u0026nbsp;to provide value and strategic options\u0026nbsp;to\u0026nbsp;clients in and out\u0026nbsp;of the courtroom. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMK Kennedy deals with all aspects of intellectual property with a specialization in litigation. Through her background in patent prosecution, she has a deep understanding of patents and their file histories.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, MK worked as a registered\u0026nbsp;patent agent\u0026nbsp;and externed for\u0026nbsp;Judge\u0026nbsp;Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMK received her law degree from the Georgia State College of Law where she graduated \u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e and was inducted into the Order of the Coif. During her time at Georgia State, she worked in the Georgia State Office of Legal Affairs with the technology transfer team doing technical and market research on a variety of inventions. Through her IP courseload and extracurriculars, MK\u0026nbsp;received a Certificate of Intellectual Property and led a team of\u0026nbsp;students to win the National Patent Drafting Competition hosted by the USPTO. She also served as the\u0026nbsp;Managing Editor for the \u003cem\u003eGeorgia State University Law Review \u003c/em\u003eand as the Programming Manager for the Intellectual Property Law Society. She was a student pupil of the IP Inn of Court and a member of the Georgia State College of Law Moot Court Team.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to law school, MK graduated from the Georgia Institute of Technology with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering,\u0026nbsp;a minor in Industrial Design, and an Intellectual Property Certificate.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"mary-kennedy","email":"mkennedy@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kennedy","nick_name":"MK","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Mary","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":761,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"summa cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2024-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"Katherine","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":2,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMK Kennedy helps clients with complex litigation and intellectual property matters. She strives to utilize her experience and knowledge of intellectual property\u0026nbsp;to provide value and strategic options\u0026nbsp;to\u0026nbsp;clients in and out\u0026nbsp;of the courtroom. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMK Kennedy deals with all aspects of intellectual property with a specialization in litigation. Through her background in patent prosecution, she has a deep understanding of patents and their file histories.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, MK worked as a registered\u0026nbsp;patent agent\u0026nbsp;and externed for\u0026nbsp;Judge\u0026nbsp;Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMK received her law degree from the Georgia State College of Law where she graduated \u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e and was inducted into the Order of the Coif. During her time at Georgia State, she worked in the Georgia State Office of Legal Affairs with the technology transfer team doing technical and market research on a variety of inventions. Through her IP courseload and extracurriculars, MK\u0026nbsp;received a Certificate of Intellectual Property and led a team of\u0026nbsp;students to win the National Patent Drafting Competition hosted by the USPTO. She also served as the\u0026nbsp;Managing Editor for the \u003cem\u003eGeorgia State University Law Review \u003c/em\u003eand as the Programming Manager for the Intellectual Property Law Society. She was a student pupil of the IP Inn of Court and a member of the Georgia State College of Law Moot Court Team.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to law school, MK graduated from the Georgia Institute of Technology with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering,\u0026nbsp;a minor in Industrial Design, and an Intellectual Property Certificate.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12394}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-07-31T20:42:13.000Z","updated_at":"2025-07-31T20:42:13.000Z","searchable_text":"Kennedy{{ FIELD }}MK Kennedy helps clients with complex litigation and intellectual property matters. She strives to utilize her experience and knowledge of intellectual property to provide value and strategic options to clients in and out of the courtroom. \nMK Kennedy deals with all aspects of intellectual property with a specialization in litigation. Through her background in patent prosecution, she has a deep understanding of patents and their file histories.\nPrior to joining the firm, MK worked as a registered patent agent and externed for Judge Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. \nMK received her law degree from the Georgia State College of Law where she graduated summa cum laude and was inducted into the Order of the Coif. During her time at Georgia State, she worked in the Georgia State Office of Legal Affairs with the technology transfer team doing technical and market research on a variety of inventions. Through her IP courseload and extracurriculars, MK received a Certificate of Intellectual Property and led a team of students to win the National Patent Drafting Competition hosted by the USPTO. She also served as the Managing Editor for the Georgia State University Law Review and as the Programming Manager for the Intellectual Property Law Society. She was a student pupil of the IP Inn of Court and a member of the Georgia State College of Law Moot Court Team. \nPrior to law school, MK graduated from the Georgia Institute of Technology with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering, a minor in Industrial Design, and an Intellectual Property Certificate.   Associate Georgia Institute of Technology  Georgia State University Georgia State University College of Law U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Georgia","searchable_name":"Mary Katherine Kennedy (MK)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446764,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7322,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAndrew is experienced in complex commercial and intellectual property disputes.\u0026nbsp;He represents clients in high stakes matters involving patent, trade secrets, and contract disputes. He approaches litigation with a court-tested perspective and a sharp focus on the issues that drive outcomes.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Andrew clerked for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas\u0026nbsp;and practiced intellectual property and complex commercial litigation in the Dallas office of another global law firm. During law school, Andrew interned for state appellate and federal district courts, represented journalists and media groups in\u0026nbsp;SMU's First Amendment Clinic, and won a moot court competition. Andrew also has an undergraduate degree in creative writing.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"nicholas-killian","email":"akillian@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 469 416 5723","matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":5059}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Killian","nick_name":"Nicholas","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Hon. W. David Counts, III, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas","years_held":"2023 - 2025"},{"name":"Intern, Hon. Amos Louis Mazzant, III, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2020 - 2020"},{"name":"Intern, Hon. Dennise Garcia, Fifth District Court of Appeals (Dallas)","years_held":"2021 - 2021"}],"first_name":"Nicholas","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":1852,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2022-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":0,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"Andrew","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":2,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAndrew is experienced in complex commercial and intellectual property disputes.\u0026nbsp;He represents clients in high stakes matters involving patent, trade secrets, and contract disputes. He approaches litigation with a court-tested perspective and a sharp focus on the issues that drive outcomes.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Andrew clerked for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas\u0026nbsp;and practiced intellectual property and complex commercial litigation in the Dallas office of another global law firm. During law school, Andrew interned for state appellate and federal district courts, represented journalists and media groups in\u0026nbsp;SMU's First Amendment Clinic, and won a moot court competition. Andrew also has an undergraduate degree in creative writing.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13417}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-16T18:35:06.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-16T18:35:06.000Z","searchable_text":"Killian{{ FIELD }}Andrew is experienced in complex commercial and intellectual property disputes. He represents clients in high stakes matters involving patent, trade secrets, and contract disputes. He approaches litigation with a court-tested perspective and a sharp focus on the issues that drive outcomes. \nPrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Andrew clerked for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas and practiced intellectual property and complex commercial litigation in the Dallas office of another global law firm. During law school, Andrew interned for state appellate and federal district courts, represented journalists and media groups in SMU's First Amendment Clinic, and won a moot court competition. Andrew also has an undergraduate degree in creative writing.  Nicholas Andrew Killian lawyer Associate Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Texas Judicial Clerk, Hon. W. David Counts, III, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Intern, Hon. Amos Louis Mazzant, III, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Intern, Hon. Dennise Garcia, Fifth District Court of Appeals (Dallas)","searchable_name":"Nicholas Andrew Killian","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null}]}}