{"data":{"filter_options":{"titles":[{"name":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office","value":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office"},{"name":"Partner","value":"Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono","value":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer"},{"name":"Partner / General Counsel","value":"Partner / General Counsel"},{"name":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops","value":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops"},{"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":"Chairman","value":"Chairman"},{"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 Attorney","value":"Senior Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Lawyer","value":"Senior Lawyer"},{"name":"Attorney","value":"Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor","value":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor"},{"name":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions","value":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions"},{"name":"Senior Government Relations Advisor","value":"Senior Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Associate General Counsel","value":"Associate General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Advisor","value":"Senior Advisor"},{"name":"Patent Agent","value":"Patent Agent"},{"name":"Consultant","value":"Consultant"},{"name":"Government Relations Advisor","value":"Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration","value":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration"},{"name":"Chief Financial Officer","value":"Chief Financial Officer"},{"name":"Chief Information Officer","value":"Chief Information Officer"},{"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":"Chief Marketing Officer","value":"Chief Marketing Officer"},{"name":"Tax Consultant","value":"Tax Consultant"},{"name":"Director of Community Affairs","value":"Director of Community Affairs"},{"name":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations","value":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations"},{"name":"Senior Office Manager","value":"Senior Office Manager"},{"name":"Director of Operations","value":"Director of Operations"},{"name":"Pro Bono Deputy","value":"Pro Bono Deputy"},{"name":"Director of Office Operations","value":"Director of Office Operations"},{"name":"Director of Operations Europe","value":"Director of Operations Europe"},{"name":"Law Clerk","value":"Law Clerk"},{"name":"Deputy General Counsel","value":"Deputy General Counsel"}],"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":3024},{"name":"Appalachian School of Law","value":2891},{"name":"Ateneo de Manila University","value":2914},{"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":"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 University","value":2984},{"name":"Brooklyn Law School","value":2705},{"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":"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":"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":"DePaul University College of Law","value":565},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":3060},{"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":"Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law","value":173},{"name":"Edinburgh Law School","value":3160},{"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":2944},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":3039},{"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 Law Center","value":734},{"name":"Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena","value":3015},{"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":"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":"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":"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":"Kline School of Law","value":611},{"name":"KU Leuven","value":3007},{"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":"LL.M. in International Crime and Justice UNICRI","value":2937},{"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":"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":"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":"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":"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":"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":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":"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 Texas School of Law","value":2055},{"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":2162},{"name":"Universidad Católica de Honduras","value":2916},{"name":"Universidad Francisco Marroquin","value":3090},{"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":"University at Buffalo Law School","value":1928},{"name":"University College Dublin Law School","value":2900},{"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 Baltimore School of Law","value":2156},{"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 Canterbury","value":2981},{"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 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 East Anglia","value":3000},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3188},{"name":"University of Georgia School of Law","value":2190},{"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 College of Law","value":2204},{"name":"University of Kansas School of Law","value":2208},{"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 Lethbridge","value":3030},{"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 Miami School of Law","value":2236},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":2237},{"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 North Carolina School of Law","value":2266},{"name":"University of North Dakota School of Law","value":2271},{"name":"University of Oklahoma Law Center","value":2747},{"name":"University of Oregon School of Law","value":2281},{"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 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 Tennessee College of Law","value":2051},{"name":"University of the West of England, Bristol","value":3001},{"name":"University of Toledo College of Law","value":2406},{"name":"University of Toronto","value":2912},{"name":"University of Utah","value":3026},{"name":"University of Virginia School of Law","value":2410},{"name":"University of Washington School of Law","value":2412},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2419},{"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":"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":"Real Estate","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":"cg-3","extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"J","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":436432,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3740,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNikesh Jindal has a wide-ranging practice that covers many industries, including most prominently the energy sector.\u0026nbsp; Having served\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;senior roles in the federal government, Nikesh uses that experience to represent clients that have complex litigation and regulatory\u0026nbsp;issues involving the government.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh has litigated cases ranging from False Claims Act suits with billions of dollars in dispute to intricate appellate matters before the Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh is equally skilled at devising and implementing strategies to help clients achieve their regulatory objectives before the federal government.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh serves as a leader in the firm's Energy Transition initiative, helping clients with their\u0026nbsp;clean and renewable energy projects.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh assists clients across the entire spectrum of clean energy technologies---carbon capture, hydrogen, wind, nuclear, advanced batteries, renewable fuels, and others.\u0026nbsp; In particular, Nikesh advises clients on how to take advantage\u0026nbsp;of funding opportunities created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act and advocates\u0026nbsp;for their interests before the Department of Energy and other agencies with responsibility for implementing these programs.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh previously served as senior counsel at the Department of Energy, where he was actively involved in several key Department initiatives, including the drafting of guidelines implementing a multi-billion dollar loan guarantee program for innovative technologies authorized under the Energy Policy Act of 2005.\u0026nbsp; Drawing upon that experience, Nikesh\u0026nbsp;is well-versed in how the government sets energy policy and administers its regulatory authority in this area, and he uses that expertise to help clients with their full range of regulatory and litigation needs before the government.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh also has extensive experience representing oil and gas companies in a broad cross-section\u0026nbsp;of matters, including royalty disputes.\u0026nbsp; He also represents oil and companies in challenges to their leases, drilling permits, and other activities critical to their onshore and offshore operations.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh also advises them on critical rulemakings and other regulatory measures and enforcement activities before\u0026nbsp;the Department of Interior other federal agencies with oversight in this area.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh also maintains an active general appellate and administrative-law based practice.\u0026nbsp; He has litigated cases in the Supreme Court and circuit courts\u0026nbsp;across the county, coordinated and led efforts to challenge several agency regulations, and has represented clients in investigations before Congress and various Executive Branch agencies. He has defended clients in several\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e-related lawsuits and government audits involving government funding programs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh joined the firm in 2014 after having worked at another large multinational law firm.\u0026nbsp; Prior to that, he was Associate General Counsel at the Office of Management and Budget within the Executive Office of the President. In that capacity, he provided counsel to senior policy officials on legal and regulatory issues arising from several federal agencies, including the Departments of Interior, Energy, Health and Human Services, and Transportation.\u0026nbsp; As part of his responsibilities, Nikesh reviewed significant rulemakings and worked directly with the relevant agencies to resolve any legal issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh served as a law clerk to the Honorable Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Portland, Oregon. He received his law degree from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor on the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eYale Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, and graduated\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 1999 with an A.B. in Economics from Dartmouth College.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"nikesh-jindal","email":"njindal@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1143,"guid":"1143.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1219,"guid":"1219.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Jindal","nick_name":"Nikesh","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Diarmuid O'Scannlain, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","years_held":"2002 - 2003"}],"first_name":"Nikesh","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[{"id":2605,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2002-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNikesh Jindal has a wide-ranging practice that covers many industries, including most prominently the energy sector.\u0026nbsp; Having served\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;senior roles in the federal government, Nikesh uses that experience to represent clients that have complex litigation and regulatory\u0026nbsp;issues involving the government.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh has litigated cases ranging from False Claims Act suits with billions of dollars in dispute to intricate appellate matters before the Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh is equally skilled at devising and implementing strategies to help clients achieve their regulatory objectives before the federal government.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh serves as a leader in the firm's Energy Transition initiative, helping clients with their\u0026nbsp;clean and renewable energy projects.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh assists clients across the entire spectrum of clean energy technologies---carbon capture, hydrogen, wind, nuclear, advanced batteries, renewable fuels, and others.\u0026nbsp; In particular, Nikesh advises clients on how to take advantage\u0026nbsp;of funding opportunities created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act and advocates\u0026nbsp;for their interests before the Department of Energy and other agencies with responsibility for implementing these programs.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh previously served as senior counsel at the Department of Energy, where he was actively involved in several key Department initiatives, including the drafting of guidelines implementing a multi-billion dollar loan guarantee program for innovative technologies authorized under the Energy Policy Act of 2005.\u0026nbsp; Drawing upon that experience, Nikesh\u0026nbsp;is well-versed in how the government sets energy policy and administers its regulatory authority in this area, and he uses that expertise to help clients with their full range of regulatory and litigation needs before the government.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh also has extensive experience representing oil and gas companies in a broad cross-section\u0026nbsp;of matters, including royalty disputes.\u0026nbsp; He also represents oil and companies in challenges to their leases, drilling permits, and other activities critical to their onshore and offshore operations.\u0026nbsp; Nikesh also advises them on critical rulemakings and other regulatory measures and enforcement activities before\u0026nbsp;the Department of Interior other federal agencies with oversight in this area.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh also maintains an active general appellate and administrative-law based practice.\u0026nbsp; He has litigated cases in the Supreme Court and circuit courts\u0026nbsp;across the county, coordinated and led efforts to challenge several agency regulations, and has represented clients in investigations before Congress and various Executive Branch agencies. He has defended clients in several\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e-related lawsuits and government audits involving government funding programs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh joined the firm in 2014 after having worked at another large multinational law firm.\u0026nbsp; Prior to that, he was Associate General Counsel at the Office of Management and Budget within the Executive Office of the President. In that capacity, he provided counsel to senior policy officials on legal and regulatory issues arising from several federal agencies, including the Departments of Interior, Energy, Health and Human Services, and Transportation.\u0026nbsp; As part of his responsibilities, Nikesh reviewed significant rulemakings and worked directly with the relevant agencies to resolve any legal issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNikesh served as a law clerk to the Honorable Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Portland, Oregon. He received his law degree from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor on the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eYale Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, and graduated\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 1999 with an A.B. in Economics from Dartmouth College.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9972}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:53:27.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:53:27.000Z","searchable_text":"Jindal{{ FIELD }}Nikesh Jindal has a wide-ranging practice that covers many industries, including most prominently the energy sector.  Having served in senior roles in the federal government, Nikesh uses that experience to represent clients that have complex litigation and regulatory issues involving the government.  Nikesh has litigated cases ranging from False Claims Act suits with billions of dollars in dispute to intricate appellate matters before the Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court.  Nikesh is equally skilled at devising and implementing strategies to help clients achieve their regulatory objectives before the federal government.\nNikesh serves as a leader in the firm's Energy Transition initiative, helping clients with their clean and renewable energy projects.  Nikesh assists clients across the entire spectrum of clean energy technologies---carbon capture, hydrogen, wind, nuclear, advanced batteries, renewable fuels, and others.  In particular, Nikesh advises clients on how to take advantage of funding opportunities created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act and advocates for their interests before the Department of Energy and other agencies with responsibility for implementing these programs.   \nNikesh previously served as senior counsel at the Department of Energy, where he was actively involved in several key Department initiatives, including the drafting of guidelines implementing a multi-billion dollar loan guarantee program for innovative technologies authorized under the Energy Policy Act of 2005.  Drawing upon that experience, Nikesh is well-versed in how the government sets energy policy and administers its regulatory authority in this area, and he uses that expertise to help clients with their full range of regulatory and litigation needs before the government.    \nNikesh also has extensive experience representing oil and gas companies in a broad cross-section of matters, including royalty disputes.  He also represents oil and companies in challenges to their leases, drilling permits, and other activities critical to their onshore and offshore operations.  Nikesh also advises them on critical rulemakings and other regulatory measures and enforcement activities before the Department of Interior other federal agencies with oversight in this area.    \nNikesh also maintains an active general appellate and administrative-law based practice.  He has litigated cases in the Supreme Court and circuit courts across the county, coordinated and led efforts to challenge several agency regulations, and has represented clients in investigations before Congress and various Executive Branch agencies. He has defended clients in several qui tam-related lawsuits and government audits involving government funding programs.\nNikesh joined the firm in 2014 after having worked at another large multinational law firm.  Prior to that, he was Associate General Counsel at the Office of Management and Budget within the Executive Office of the President. In that capacity, he provided counsel to senior policy officials on legal and regulatory issues arising from several federal agencies, including the Departments of Interior, Energy, Health and Human Services, and Transportation.  As part of his responsibilities, Nikesh reviewed significant rulemakings and worked directly with the relevant agencies to resolve any legal issues.\nNikesh served as a law clerk to the Honorable Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Portland, Oregon. He received his law degree from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor on the Yale Law Journal, and graduated summa cum laude in 1999 with an A.B. in Economics from Dartmouth College. Partner Dartmouth College  Yale University Yale Law School District of Columbia New York Council Member, ABA Section on Administrative Law Law Clerk, Diarmuid O'Scannlain, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","searchable_name":"Nikesh Jindal","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":444346,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5737,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eArwen Johnson is a trial lawyer\u0026nbsp;who delivers results in high-stakes cases and regularly wins dispositive motions.\u0026nbsp; Arwen specializes in intellectual property, employment, and class action disputes for entertainment, tech, and healthcare companies. Arwen\u0026rsquo;s clients rely on her expertise in trade secrets, employee mobility, partnership disputes, copyright infringement and idea theft,\u0026nbsp;defamation and high net worth litigation.\u0026nbsp; They also count on her extensive knowledge of emergency and provisional remedies, the anti-SLAPP statute, class action procedures, and trial motion practice and appeals.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Arwen also serves as the Managing Partner of the firm's Los Angeles office.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eArwen's publications and presentations include:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;Powerful Women in the Courtroom,\u0026rdquo; Daily Journal\u0026rsquo;s Women Leadership in Law Forum, May 2019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eEpic Systems Corp. v. Lewis\u003c/em\u003e and Its Aftermath and Impact on Class Action Waivers,\u0026rdquo; Bridgeport Continuing Education, January 2019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;Launching Your Career: Keys to Success in a Law Firm,\u0026rdquo; UCLA Law Women LEAD Summit, February 2017\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Navigating California\u0026rsquo;s Parental Leave Laws,\u0026rdquo; California Minority Counsel Program, June 2018 (with Noah Perez-Silverman)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;California's No Aid Clause and Religious Endorsement: Davies v. County of Los Angeles,\u0026rdquo; California Minority Counsel Program, July 2016 (with Kimberly M. Singer)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Overpriced Security? A Review of the SEC\u0026rsquo;s Proposed Rulemaking on \u0026lsquo;Pay-to-Play,\u0026rsquo;\u0026rdquo; American Bar Association\u0026rsquo;s Fourth Annual National Institute on Securities Fraud, October 2009 (with David K. Willingham and Jeffrey H. Rutherford)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","slug":"arwen-johnson","email":"arwen.johnson@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon motion to compel arbitration on behalf of tech client of putative class action alleging misclassification of couriers and raising novel legal theories relates to COVID-19\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon nearly all claims tried to the jury in fraud, interference, and trade secret dispute between tech startup and government contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon bench trial on claims involving an employee\u0026rsquo;s entitlement to Labor Code penalties by securing a nonsuit after the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s opening statement\u0026mdash;including the client\u0026rsquo;s attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees, a rare employer win\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment in multi-million-dollar partnership dispute. The court\u0026rsquo;s order specifically complimented the \u0026ldquo;excellent briefing,\u0026rdquo; which ultimately led to a $350,000 fee award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment on behalf of the film studio and filmmakers behind the blockbuster film trilogy\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Matrix\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a copyright infringement lawsuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a permanent injunction against the County of Los Angeles in federal court, thereby preventing an attempt to include an overtly religious symbol on the County Seal. This case was highlighted as a signature matter by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated wage-and-hour and disability discrimination class action allegations in a twenty-count action brought by a former employee of a film studio client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment in a major case brought against a large energy company by a real estate developer alleging $50-100 million in lost sales\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated all claims at the pleading stage in multiple trust and estates litigations\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully prosecuted and defended multiple anti-SLAPP motions, at both the trial and appellate levels, resulting in complete victories\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFavorably resolved multiple partnership dissolution actions and employment disputes on behalf of major corporations and small businesses\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":15,"guid":"15.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":18,"guid":"18.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":766,"guid":"766.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":121,"guid":"121.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":135,"guid":"135.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Johnson","nick_name":"Arwen","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Dean D. Pregerson, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California","years_held":"2006 - 2007"},{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Harry Pregerson, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","years_held":"2007 - 2008"}],"first_name":"Arwen","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2162,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2006-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"R.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"First Amendment Award, ACLU Foundation of Southern California","detail":"2017"},{"title":"Daily Journal, Top 40 Under 40","detail":"2017"},{"title":"Fellow of the Legal Council on Legal Diversity","detail":"2018"},{"title":"Southern California Super Lawyers – Rising Star in Business Litigation","detail":"2013–present"},{"title":"Up-and-Coming 50 – Women Southern California Rising Stars ","detail":"2015–present"},{"title":"Up-and-Coming 100 – Southern California Rising Stars ","detail":"2015–present"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/arwen-johnson-713283119/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":95,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eArwen Johnson is a trial lawyer\u0026nbsp;who delivers results in high-stakes cases and regularly wins dispositive motions.\u0026nbsp; Arwen specializes in intellectual property, employment, and class action disputes for entertainment, tech, and healthcare companies. Arwen\u0026rsquo;s clients rely on her expertise in trade secrets, employee mobility, partnership disputes, copyright infringement and idea theft,\u0026nbsp;defamation and high net worth litigation.\u0026nbsp; They also count on her extensive knowledge of emergency and provisional remedies, the anti-SLAPP statute, class action procedures, and trial motion practice and appeals.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Arwen also serves as the Managing Partner of the firm's Los Angeles office.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eArwen's publications and presentations include:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;Powerful Women in the Courtroom,\u0026rdquo; Daily Journal\u0026rsquo;s Women Leadership in Law Forum, May 2019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eEpic Systems Corp. v. Lewis\u003c/em\u003e and Its Aftermath and Impact on Class Action Waivers,\u0026rdquo; Bridgeport Continuing Education, January 2019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpeaker, \u0026ldquo;Launching Your Career: Keys to Success in a Law Firm,\u0026rdquo; UCLA Law Women LEAD Summit, February 2017\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Navigating California\u0026rsquo;s Parental Leave Laws,\u0026rdquo; California Minority Counsel Program, June 2018 (with Noah Perez-Silverman)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;California's No Aid Clause and Religious Endorsement: Davies v. County of Los Angeles,\u0026rdquo; California Minority Counsel Program, July 2016 (with Kimberly M. Singer)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Overpriced Security? A Review of the SEC\u0026rsquo;s Proposed Rulemaking on \u0026lsquo;Pay-to-Play,\u0026rsquo;\u0026rdquo; American Bar Association\u0026rsquo;s Fourth Annual National Institute on Securities Fraud, October 2009 (with David K. Willingham and Jeffrey H. Rutherford)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon motion to compel arbitration on behalf of tech client of putative class action alleging misclassification of couriers and raising novel legal theories relates to COVID-19\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon nearly all claims tried to the jury in fraud, interference, and trade secret dispute between tech startup and government contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon bench trial on claims involving an employee\u0026rsquo;s entitlement to Labor Code penalties by securing a nonsuit after the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s opening statement\u0026mdash;including the client\u0026rsquo;s attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees, a rare employer win\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment in multi-million-dollar partnership dispute. The court\u0026rsquo;s order specifically complimented the \u0026ldquo;excellent briefing,\u0026rdquo; which ultimately led to a $350,000 fee award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment on behalf of the film studio and filmmakers behind the blockbuster film trilogy\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Matrix\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a copyright infringement lawsuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a permanent injunction against the County of Los Angeles in federal court, thereby preventing an attempt to include an overtly religious symbol on the County Seal. This case was highlighted as a signature matter by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated wage-and-hour and disability discrimination class action allegations in a twenty-count action brought by a former employee of a film studio client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon summary judgment in a major case brought against a large energy company by a real estate developer alleging $50-100 million in lost sales\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated all claims at the pleading stage in multiple trust and estates litigations\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully prosecuted and defended multiple anti-SLAPP motions, at both the trial and appellate levels, resulting in complete victories\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFavorably resolved multiple partnership dissolution actions and employment disputes on behalf of major corporations and small businesses\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"First Amendment Award, ACLU Foundation of Southern California","detail":"2017"},{"title":"Daily Journal, Top 40 Under 40","detail":"2017"},{"title":"Fellow of the Legal Council on Legal Diversity","detail":"2018"},{"title":"Southern California Super Lawyers – Rising Star in Business Litigation","detail":"2013–present"},{"title":"Up-and-Coming 50 – Women Southern California Rising Stars ","detail":"2015–present"},{"title":"Up-and-Coming 100 – Southern California Rising Stars ","detail":"2015–present"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":8091}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-16T20:31:16.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T20:31:16.000Z","searchable_text":"Johnson{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"First Amendment Award, ACLU Foundation of Southern California\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Daily Journal, Top 40 Under 40\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Fellow of the Legal Council on Legal Diversity\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Southern California Super Lawyers – Rising Star in Business Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2013–present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Up-and-Coming 50 – Women Southern California Rising Stars \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2015–present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Up-and-Coming 100 – Southern California Rising Stars \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2015–present\"}{{ FIELD }}Won motion to compel arbitration on behalf of tech client of putative class action alleging misclassification of couriers and raising novel legal theories relates to COVID-19{{ FIELD }}Won nearly all claims tried to the jury in fraud, interference, and trade secret dispute between tech startup and government contractor{{ FIELD }}Won bench trial on claims involving an employee’s entitlement to Labor Code penalties by securing a nonsuit after the plaintiff’s opening statement—including the client’s attorneys’ fees, a rare employer win{{ FIELD }}Won summary judgment in multi-million-dollar partnership dispute. The court’s order specifically complimented the “excellent briefing,” which ultimately led to a $350,000 fee award.{{ FIELD }}Won summary judgment on behalf of the film studio and filmmakers behind the blockbuster film trilogy The Matrix in a copyright infringement lawsuit{{ FIELD }}Won a permanent injunction against the County of Los Angeles in federal court, thereby preventing an attempt to include an overtly religious symbol on the County Seal. This case was highlighted as a signature matter by Law360{{ FIELD }}Defeated wage-and-hour and disability discrimination class action allegations in a twenty-count action brought by a former employee of a film studio client{{ FIELD }}Won summary judgment in a major case brought against a large energy company by a real estate developer alleging $50-100 million in lost sales{{ FIELD }}Defeated all claims at the pleading stage in multiple trust and estates litigations{{ FIELD }}Successfully prosecuted and defended multiple anti-SLAPP motions, at both the trial and appellate levels, resulting in complete victories{{ FIELD }}Favorably resolved multiple partnership dissolution actions and employment disputes on behalf of major corporations and small businesses{{ FIELD }}Arwen Johnson is a trial lawyer who delivers results in high-stakes cases and regularly wins dispositive motions.  Arwen specializes in intellectual property, employment, and class action disputes for entertainment, tech, and healthcare companies. Arwen’s clients rely on her expertise in trade secrets, employee mobility, partnership disputes, copyright infringement and idea theft, defamation and high net worth litigation.  They also count on her extensive knowledge of emergency and provisional remedies, the anti-SLAPP statute, class action procedures, and trial motion practice and appeals.  Arwen also serves as the Managing Partner of the firm's Los Angeles office. \nArwen's publications and presentations include:\n\nSpeaker, “Powerful Women in the Courtroom,” Daily Journal’s Women Leadership in Law Forum, May 2019\nSpeaker, “Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis and Its Aftermath and Impact on Class Action Waivers,” Bridgeport Continuing Education, January 2019\nSpeaker, “Launching Your Career: Keys to Success in a Law Firm,” UCLA Law Women LEAD Summit, February 2017\nAuthor, “Navigating California’s Parental Leave Laws,” California Minority Counsel Program, June 2018 (with Noah Perez-Silverman)\nAuthor, “California's No Aid Clause and Religious Endorsement: Davies v. County of Los Angeles,” California Minority Counsel Program, July 2016 (with Kimberly M. Singer)\nAuthor, “Overpriced Security? A Review of the SEC’s Proposed Rulemaking on ‘Pay-to-Play,’” American Bar Association’s Fourth Annual National Institute on Securities Fraud, October 2009 (with David K. Willingham and Jeffrey H. Rutherford)\n Partner First Amendment Award, ACLU Foundation of Southern California 2017 Daily Journal, Top 40 Under 40 2017 Fellow of the Legal Council on Legal Diversity 2018 Southern California Super Lawyers – Rising Star in Business Litigation 2013–present Up-and-Coming 50 – Women Southern California Rising Stars  2015–present Up-and-Coming 100 – Southern California Rising Stars  2015–present Rice University  University of California-Los Angeles UCLA School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Central District of California U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California California Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles California JNE Commission ABA Leadership, Judicial Intern Opportunity Program (JIOP), Regional Co-Chair for Los Angeles Delegate, LACBA California Conference of Bar Associations Vice President, Advisory Board of the Western Center on Law and Poverty (2013–2016) California Women Lawyers Law Clerk, Hon. Dean D. Pregerson, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Law Clerk, Hon. Harry Pregerson, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Won motion to compel arbitration on behalf of tech client of putative class action alleging misclassification of couriers and raising novel legal theories relates to COVID-19 Won nearly all claims tried to the jury in fraud, interference, and trade secret dispute between tech startup and government contractor Won bench trial on claims involving an employee’s entitlement to Labor Code penalties by securing a nonsuit after the plaintiff’s opening statement—including the client’s attorneys’ fees, a rare employer win Won summary judgment in multi-million-dollar partnership dispute. The court’s order specifically complimented the “excellent briefing,” which ultimately led to a $350,000 fee award. Won summary judgment on behalf of the film studio and filmmakers behind the blockbuster film trilogy The Matrix in a copyright infringement lawsuit Won a permanent injunction against the County of Los Angeles in federal court, thereby preventing an attempt to include an overtly religious symbol on the County Seal. This case was highlighted as a signature matter by Law360 Defeated wage-and-hour and disability discrimination class action allegations in a twenty-count action brought by a former employee of a film studio client Won summary judgment in a major case brought against a large energy company by a real estate developer alleging $50-100 million in lost sales Defeated all claims at the pleading stage in multiple trust and estates litigations Successfully prosecuted and defended multiple anti-SLAPP motions, at both the trial and appellate levels, resulting in complete victories Favorably resolved multiple partnership dissolution actions and employment disputes on behalf of major corporations and small businesses","searchable_name":"Arwen R. Johnson","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":436388,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2857,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePaul Johnson litigates large, complex cases in California state and federal courts. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law practice, Paul represents clients in appellate proceedings. Paul's work for clients in trial courts often involves unsettled legal issues or complex civil procedure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's litigation experience\u0026mdash;over 30 years\u0026mdash;includes all phases of appellate-court and trial-court proceedings. Certified by the State Bar of California's Board of Legal Specialization as a specialist in appellate law, Paul has argued before state and federal appellate courts inside and outside California. Paul previously chaired the Committee on Appellate Courts of the State Bar of California and has presented on appellate law and practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's experience as lead trial counsel (both bench and jury) informs his work as an appellate advisor on trial teams. At the trial court level, Paul also consults on strategy and handles procedural matters such as personal jurisdiction, \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eforum non conveniens\u003c/em\u003e, state-vs.-federal jurisdiction, and choice of law, often in mass litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's broad substantive-law experience includes administrative review, antitrust, arbitration review, employment, energy, environmental, infrastructure, intellectual property, land use, mass torts, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, other product liability, punitive damages, reputation, securities and constitutional issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"paul-johnson","email":"pjohnson@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBrown v. McKesson Corporation\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B266990, Jan. 26, 2017) (affirming judgment against dozens of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eOrrell v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP\u003c/em\u003e (9th Cir. No. 14-56845, Oct. 28, 2016) (affirming judgment against hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eNon-California-Resident Plaintiffs v. AstraZeneca LP\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. B260895, July 15, 2016) (obtaining dismissal of appeal by hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs who challenged \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eforum non conveniens\u003c/em\u003e dismissal).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSuffolk County Water Authority v. The Dow Chemical Company\u003c/em\u003e, 991 N.Y.S.2d 613, 121 A.D.3d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept., 2014) (dismissing numerous well-water contamination claims by a major public water supplier).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eMacasa v. Dole Food Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B245138, 2014) (rejecting assertion of longer, foreign limitations period by several thousand plaintiffs who alleged toxic exposures in the Philippines; affirming dismissal of claims as untimely).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLaguna v. Dole Food Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B233497, 2014) (affirming decision to vacate judgment for plaintiffs upon finding fraudulent scheme to assert toxic exposures at Nicaraguan banana farms).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBombardier Recreational Products, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Canada ULC\u003c/em\u003e, 216 Cal. App. 4th 591, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 66 (2013) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eHH, LLC\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ev.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eWestLB AG\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. D060531, 2012) (holding that cross-complaint in real estate financing litigation was not a SLAPP suit).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eEnayati v. UOP, LLC\u003c/em\u003e (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC430304, 2012) (nonsuit judgment based on legal standard of care for engineering professionals).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ePacific Rim Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Aon Risk Insurances Services West, Inc.,\u003c/em\u003e 203 Cal. App. 4th 1278, 183 Cal. Rptr. 3d 294(2012) (holding that insurance broker did not have ongoing duty to additional insured).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eCity of Modesto etc. et al. v. The Dow Chemical Company et al.\u003c/em\u003e (San Francisco County Super. Ct. Nos. 999345, 999643; Cal. Ct. App. No. A134419 \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e) (post-trial motions; appellate matters); \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eThe Dow Chemical Company v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. A125426, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; partial judgment following mistrial).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDow Chemical Canada ULC v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e, 202 Cal. App. 4th 170, 134 Cal. Rptr. 3d 597 (2011) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDow Chemical Canada ULC v. Fandino\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 3088 (June 28, 2011, No. 10-250) (GVR: granting certiorari petition challenging personal jurisdiction, vacating judgment, and remanding for further consideration in light of \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJ. McIntyre\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJ. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011) (amicus brief for Dow Chemical Canada ULC, asserting due process insufficiency of stream-of-commerce test for personal jurisdiction).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJones v. ConocoPhillips\u003c/em\u003e, 198 Cal. App. 4th 1187, 130 Cal. Rptr. 3d 571 (2011) (addressing pleading standards for toxic-tort actions).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eAbrego v. The Dow Chemical Company\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B222612, 2010) (affirming forum non conveniens dismissals).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGCM Air Group LLC v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (9th Cir. No. 09-15825, 2010) (defending property contamination claims).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSafeway Inc. v. Pivotal Sales Company\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. A116637, 2010) (commercial and antitrust issues; judgment for client affirmed).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eClayworth v. Pfizer Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, 49 Cal. 4th 758, 233 P.2d 1066, 111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 666 (2010) (industry-wide pharmaceutical antitrust litigation; blocking \"pass-on\" evidence), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A131804, 2012) (affirming summary judgment on merits for defendants), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A132527, 2014) (affirming award of costs to defendants).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eTexaco Inc. v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B216264, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; dismissal of asbestos action based on construction of California borrowing statute).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eI\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003en re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI)\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Pa., MDL Docket No. 875) (litigation of federal jurisdiction, government contractor defense).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLongs Drug Stores California, Inc. v. Shea\u003c/em\u003e, 2005 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 414, 2005 WL 91682 (2005) (overcoming anti-SLAPP opposition to business defamation claim).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDrolla v. ChevronTexaco Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 2004 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 11025, 2004 WL 2750328 (2004) (defense of maritime employment claim alleging disability discrimination).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBerry, et al. v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (N.D. Cal., No. C 00-1353 SBA, 2002) (dismissal of class action claims alleging employment discrimination), 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25920, 2003 WL 23098426 (9th Cir. 2003) (defense of individual discrimination claims).\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":90}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Johnson","nick_name":"Paul","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Paul","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"R.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Fellow ","detail":"American Bar Foundation"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrichardjohnson/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePaul Johnson litigates large, complex cases in California state and federal courts. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law practice, Paul represents clients in appellate proceedings. Paul's work for clients in trial courts often involves unsettled legal issues or complex civil procedure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's litigation experience\u0026mdash;over 30 years\u0026mdash;includes all phases of appellate-court and trial-court proceedings. Certified by the State Bar of California's Board of Legal Specialization as a specialist in appellate law, Paul has argued before state and federal appellate courts inside and outside California. Paul previously chaired the Committee on Appellate Courts of the State Bar of California and has presented on appellate law and practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's experience as lead trial counsel (both bench and jury) informs his work as an appellate advisor on trial teams. At the trial court level, Paul also consults on strategy and handles procedural matters such as personal jurisdiction, \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eforum non conveniens\u003c/em\u003e, state-vs.-federal jurisdiction, and choice of law, often in mass litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul's broad substantive-law experience includes administrative review, antitrust, arbitration review, employment, energy, environmental, infrastructure, intellectual property, land use, mass torts, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, other product liability, punitive damages, reputation, securities and constitutional issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBrown v. McKesson Corporation\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B266990, Jan. 26, 2017) (affirming judgment against dozens of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eOrrell v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP\u003c/em\u003e (9th Cir. No. 14-56845, Oct. 28, 2016) (affirming judgment against hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eNon-California-Resident Plaintiffs v. AstraZeneca LP\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. B260895, July 15, 2016) (obtaining dismissal of appeal by hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs who challenged \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eforum non conveniens\u003c/em\u003e dismissal).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSuffolk County Water Authority v. The Dow Chemical Company\u003c/em\u003e, 991 N.Y.S.2d 613, 121 A.D.3d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept., 2014) (dismissing numerous well-water contamination claims by a major public water supplier).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eMacasa v. Dole Food Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B245138, 2014) (rejecting assertion of longer, foreign limitations period by several thousand plaintiffs who alleged toxic exposures in the Philippines; affirming dismissal of claims as untimely).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLaguna v. Dole Food Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B233497, 2014) (affirming decision to vacate judgment for plaintiffs upon finding fraudulent scheme to assert toxic exposures at Nicaraguan banana farms).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBombardier Recreational Products, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Canada ULC\u003c/em\u003e, 216 Cal. App. 4th 591, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 66 (2013) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eHH, LLC\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ev.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eWestLB AG\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. D060531, 2012) (holding that cross-complaint in real estate financing litigation was not a SLAPP suit).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eEnayati v. UOP, LLC\u003c/em\u003e (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC430304, 2012) (nonsuit judgment based on legal standard of care for engineering professionals).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ePacific Rim Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Aon Risk Insurances Services West, Inc.,\u003c/em\u003e 203 Cal. App. 4th 1278, 183 Cal. Rptr. 3d 294(2012) (holding that insurance broker did not have ongoing duty to additional insured).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eCity of Modesto etc. et al. v. The Dow Chemical Company et al.\u003c/em\u003e (San Francisco County Super. Ct. Nos. 999345, 999643; Cal. Ct. App. No. A134419 \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e) (post-trial motions; appellate matters); \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eThe Dow Chemical Company v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. A125426, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; partial judgment following mistrial).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDow Chemical Canada ULC v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e, 202 Cal. App. 4th 170, 134 Cal. Rptr. 3d 597 (2011) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDow Chemical Canada ULC v. Fandino\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 3088 (June 28, 2011, No. 10-250) (GVR: granting certiorari petition challenging personal jurisdiction, vacating judgment, and remanding for further consideration in light of \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJ. McIntyre\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJ. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011) (amicus brief for Dow Chemical Canada ULC, asserting due process insufficiency of stream-of-commerce test for personal jurisdiction).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJones v. ConocoPhillips\u003c/em\u003e, 198 Cal. App. 4th 1187, 130 Cal. Rptr. 3d 571 (2011) (addressing pleading standards for toxic-tort actions).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eAbrego v. The Dow Chemical Company\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B222612, 2010) (affirming forum non conveniens dismissals).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGCM Air Group LLC v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (9th Cir. No. 09-15825, 2010) (defending property contamination claims).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSafeway Inc. v. Pivotal Sales Company\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. A116637, 2010) (commercial and antitrust issues; judgment for client affirmed).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eClayworth v. Pfizer Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, 49 Cal. 4th 758, 233 P.2d 1066, 111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 666 (2010) (industry-wide pharmaceutical antitrust litigation; blocking \"pass-on\" evidence), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A131804, 2012) (affirming summary judgment on merits for defendants), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A132527, 2014) (affirming award of costs to defendants).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eTexaco Inc. v. Superior Court\u003c/em\u003e (Cal. Ct. App. No. B216264, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; dismissal of asbestos action based on construction of California borrowing statute).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eI\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003en re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI)\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Pa., MDL Docket No. 875) (litigation of federal jurisdiction, government contractor defense).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLongs Drug Stores California, Inc. v. Shea\u003c/em\u003e, 2005 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 414, 2005 WL 91682 (2005) (overcoming anti-SLAPP opposition to business defamation claim).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eDrolla v. ChevronTexaco Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 2004 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 11025, 2004 WL 2750328 (2004) (defense of maritime employment claim alleging disability discrimination).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eBerry, et al. v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/em\u003e (N.D. Cal., No. C 00-1353 SBA, 2002) (dismissal of class action claims alleging employment discrimination), 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25920, 2003 WL 23098426 (9th Cir. 2003) (defense of individual discrimination claims).\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Fellow ","detail":"American Bar Foundation"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4233}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:38.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:38.000Z","searchable_text":"Johnson{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Fellow \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"American Bar Foundation\"}{{ FIELD }}Brown v. McKesson Corporation (Cal. Ct. App. No. B266990, Jan. 26, 2017) (affirming judgment against dozens of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).{{ FIELD }}Orrell v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (9th Cir. No. 14-56845, Oct. 28, 2016) (affirming judgment against hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation).{{ FIELD }}Non-California-Resident Plaintiffs v. AstraZeneca LP (Cal. Ct. App. B260895, July 15, 2016) (obtaining dismissal of appeal by hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs who challenged forum non conveniens dismissal).{{ FIELD }}Suffolk County Water Authority v. The Dow Chemical Company, 991 N.Y.S.2d 613, 121 A.D.3d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept., 2014) (dismissing numerous well-water contamination claims by a major public water supplier).{{ FIELD }}Macasa v. Dole Food Company, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. No. B245138, 2014) (rejecting assertion of longer, foreign limitations period by several thousand plaintiffs who alleged toxic exposures in the Philippines; affirming dismissal of claims as untimely).{{ FIELD }}Laguna v. Dole Food Company, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. No. B233497, 2014) (affirming decision to vacate judgment for plaintiffs upon finding fraudulent scheme to assert toxic exposures at Nicaraguan banana farms).{{ FIELD }}Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Canada ULC, 216 Cal. App. 4th 591, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 66 (2013) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).{{ FIELD }}HH, LLC v. WestLB AG (Cal. Ct. App. No. D060531, 2012) (holding that cross-complaint in real estate financing litigation was not a SLAPP suit).{{ FIELD }}Enayati v. UOP, LLC (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC430304, 2012) (nonsuit judgment based on legal standard of care for engineering professionals).{{ FIELD }}Pacific Rim Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Aon Risk Insurances Services West, Inc., 203 Cal. App. 4th 1278, 183 Cal. Rptr. 3d 294(2012) (holding that insurance broker did not have ongoing duty to additional insured).{{ FIELD }}City of Modesto etc. et al. v. The Dow Chemical Company et al. (San Francisco County Super. Ct. Nos. 999345, 999643; Cal. Ct. App. No. A134419 et al.) (post-trial motions; appellate matters); The Dow Chemical Company v. Superior Court (Cal. Ct. App. No. A125426, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; partial judgment following mistrial).{{ FIELD }}Dow Chemical Canada ULC v. Superior Court, 202 Cal. App. 4th 170, 134 Cal. Rptr. 3d 597 (2011) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action).{{ FIELD }}Dow Chemical Canada ULC v. Fandino, 131 S. Ct. 3088 (June 28, 2011, No. 10-250) (GVR: granting certiorari petition challenging personal jurisdiction, vacating judgment, and remanding for further consideration in light of J. McIntyre).{{ FIELD }}J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011) (amicus brief for Dow Chemical Canada ULC, asserting due process insufficiency of stream-of-commerce test for personal jurisdiction).{{ FIELD }}Jones v. ConocoPhillips, 198 Cal. App. 4th 1187, 130 Cal. Rptr. 3d 571 (2011) (addressing pleading standards for toxic-tort actions).{{ FIELD }}Abrego v. The Dow Chemical Company (Cal. Ct. App. No. B222612, 2010) (affirming forum non conveniens dismissals).{{ FIELD }}GCM Air Group LLC v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (9th Cir. No. 09-15825, 2010) (defending property contamination claims).{{ FIELD }}Safeway Inc. v. Pivotal Sales Company (Cal. Ct. App. No. A116637, 2010) (commercial and antitrust issues; judgment for client affirmed).{{ FIELD }}Clayworth v. Pfizer Inc., 49 Cal. 4th 758, 233 P.2d 1066, 111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 666 (2010) (industry-wide pharmaceutical antitrust litigation; blocking \"pass-on\" evidence), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A131804, 2012) (affirming summary judgment on merits for defendants), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A132527, 2014) (affirming award of costs to defendants).{{ FIELD }}Texaco Inc. v. Superior Court (Cal. Ct. App. No. B216264, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; dismissal of asbestos action based on construction of California borrowing statute).{{ FIELD }}In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI) (E.D. Pa., MDL Docket No. 875) (litigation of federal jurisdiction, government contractor defense).{{ FIELD }}Longs Drug Stores California, Inc. v. Shea, 2005 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 414, 2005 WL 91682 (2005) (overcoming anti-SLAPP opposition to business defamation claim).{{ FIELD }}Drolla v. ChevronTexaco Corp., 2004 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 11025, 2004 WL 2750328 (2004) (defense of maritime employment claim alleging disability discrimination).{{ FIELD }}Berry, et al. v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (N.D. Cal., No. C 00-1353 SBA, 2002) (dismissal of class action claims alleging employment discrimination), 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25920, 2003 WL 23098426 (9th Cir. 2003) (defense of individual discrimination claims).{{ FIELD }}Paul Johnson litigates large, complex cases in California state and federal courts. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law practice, Paul represents clients in appellate proceedings. Paul's work for clients in trial courts often involves unsettled legal issues or complex civil procedure.\n\nPaul's litigation experience—over 30 years—includes all phases of appellate-court and trial-court proceedings. Certified by the State Bar of California's Board of Legal Specialization as a specialist in appellate law, Paul has argued before state and federal appellate courts inside and outside California. Paul previously chaired the Committee on Appellate Courts of the State Bar of California and has presented on appellate law and practice.\nPaul's experience as lead trial counsel (both bench and jury) informs his work as an appellate advisor on trial teams. At the trial court level, Paul also consults on strategy and handles procedural matters such as personal jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, state-vs.-federal jurisdiction, and choice of law, often in mass litigation.\nPaul's broad substantive-law experience includes administrative review, antitrust, arbitration review, employment, energy, environmental, infrastructure, intellectual property, land use, mass torts, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, other product liability, punitive damages, reputation, securities and constitutional issues.\nPaul is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation. Paul R. Johnson Partner Fellow  American Bar Foundation Yale University Yale Law School University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley, School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Central District of California U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California California State Bar of California Certified Specialist, Appellate Law (State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization) Brown v. McKesson Corporation (Cal. Ct. App. No. B266990, Jan. 26, 2017) (affirming judgment against dozens of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation). Orrell v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (9th Cir. No. 14-56845, Oct. 28, 2016) (affirming judgment against hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs based on exclusion of medical expert opinion on general causation). Non-California-Resident Plaintiffs v. AstraZeneca LP (Cal. Ct. App. B260895, July 15, 2016) (obtaining dismissal of appeal by hundreds of pharmaceutical-product-liability plaintiffs who challenged forum non conveniens dismissal). Suffolk County Water Authority v. The Dow Chemical Company, 991 N.Y.S.2d 613, 121 A.D.3d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept., 2014) (dismissing numerous well-water contamination claims by a major public water supplier). Macasa v. Dole Food Company, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. No. B245138, 2014) (rejecting assertion of longer, foreign limitations period by several thousand plaintiffs who alleged toxic exposures in the Philippines; affirming dismissal of claims as untimely). Laguna v. Dole Food Company, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. No. B233497, 2014) (affirming decision to vacate judgment for plaintiffs upon finding fraudulent scheme to assert toxic exposures at Nicaraguan banana farms). Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Canada ULC, 216 Cal. App. 4th 591, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 66 (2013) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action). HH, LLC v. WestLB AG (Cal. Ct. App. No. D060531, 2012) (holding that cross-complaint in real estate financing litigation was not a SLAPP suit). Enayati v. UOP, LLC (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC430304, 2012) (nonsuit judgment based on legal standard of care for engineering professionals). Pacific Rim Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Aon Risk Insurances Services West, Inc., 203 Cal. App. 4th 1278, 183 Cal. Rptr. 3d 294(2012) (holding that insurance broker did not have ongoing duty to additional insured). City of Modesto etc. et al. v. The Dow Chemical Company et al. (San Francisco County Super. Ct. Nos. 999345, 999643; Cal. Ct. App. No. A134419 et al.) (post-trial motions; appellate matters); The Dow Chemical Company v. Superior Court (Cal. Ct. App. No. A125426, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; partial judgment following mistrial). Dow Chemical Canada ULC v. Superior Court, 202 Cal. App. 4th 170, 134 Cal. Rptr. 3d 597 (2011) (holding successor to Canadian component manufacturer not subject to personal jurisdiction in California product liability action). Dow Chemical Canada ULC v. Fandino, 131 S. Ct. 3088 (June 28, 2011, No. 10-250) (GVR: granting certiorari petition challenging personal jurisdiction, vacating judgment, and remanding for further consideration in light of J. McIntyre). J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011) (amicus brief for Dow Chemical Canada ULC, asserting due process insufficiency of stream-of-commerce test for personal jurisdiction). Jones v. ConocoPhillips, 198 Cal. App. 4th 1187, 130 Cal. Rptr. 3d 571 (2011) (addressing pleading standards for toxic-tort actions). Abrego v. The Dow Chemical Company (Cal. Ct. App. No. B222612, 2010) (affirming forum non conveniens dismissals). GCM Air Group LLC v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (9th Cir. No. 09-15825, 2010) (defending property contamination claims). Safeway Inc. v. Pivotal Sales Company (Cal. Ct. App. No. A116637, 2010) (commercial and antitrust issues; judgment for client affirmed). Clayworth v. Pfizer Inc., 49 Cal. 4th 758, 233 P.2d 1066, 111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 666 (2010) (industry-wide pharmaceutical antitrust litigation; blocking \"pass-on\" evidence), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A131804, 2012) (affirming summary judgment on merits for defendants), (Cal. Ct. App. No. A132527, 2014) (affirming award of costs to defendants). Texaco Inc. v. Superior Court (Cal. Ct. App. No. B216264, 2009) (alternative writ granted and followed by trial court; dismissal of asbestos action based on construction of California borrowing statute). In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI) (E.D. Pa., MDL Docket No. 875) (litigation of federal jurisdiction, government contractor defense). Longs Drug Stores California, Inc. v. Shea, 2005 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 414, 2005 WL 91682 (2005) (overcoming anti-SLAPP opposition to business defamation claim). Drolla v. ChevronTexaco Corp., 2004 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 11025, 2004 WL 2750328 (2004) (defense of maritime employment claim alleging disability discrimination). Berry, et al. v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (N.D. Cal., No. C 00-1353 SBA, 2002) (dismissal of class action claims alleging employment discrimination), 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25920, 2003 WL 23098426 (9th Cir. 2003) (defense of individual discrimination claims).","searchable_name":"Paul R. Johnson","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":443189,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5684,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBenjamin Jones (Ben) focuses his practice on resolving complex business disputes in the construction, energy, and private equity industries.\u0026nbsp;Ben is ranked Band 2 in Chambers for Construction: International Disputes.\u0026nbsp;He has represented owners, sponsors and\u0026nbsp;contractors in disputes arising from dozens of infrastructure projects throughout the United States and internationally.\u0026nbsp;Many of Ben's matters relate to solar, wind, and battery\u0026nbsp;projects; he also has extensive experience with disputes involving\u0026nbsp;power plants, refineries,\u0026nbsp;and manufacturing facilities.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen represents clients in disputes involving a wide range of infrastructure projects, including wind, solar, and battery energy storage system projects, power plants, FPSOs, LNG facilities, data centers, semiconductor manufacturing facilities, and commercial buildings.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen also represents clients in the energy and\u0026nbsp;private equity industries\u0026nbsp;in the resolution of complex business disputes involving Purchase \u0026amp; Sale Agreements, Credit Agreements, Asset Management Agreements, Power Purchase Agreements and LLC Agreements.\u0026nbsp; In addition to formal dispute resolution,\u0026nbsp;Ben dedicates a significant portion of his practice to pre-dispute counseling.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen also regularly represents clients in foreign litigation proceedings.\u0026nbsp; Recently, Ben was part of a team that represented Refineria de Cartagena (Reficar) in defending against multi-jurisdictional restructuring proceedings brought by an award debtor to extinguish Reficar's nearly $1.3 billion arbitration award, and Ben played a key role in securing courtroom victories that resulting in Reficar obtaining a package worth approximately $900 million.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Ben also represented one of the world's largest energy companies in successfully\u0026nbsp;defending against dozens of environmental lawsuits filed in Indonesian courts.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThroughout the course of his career, Ben has represented energy-sector clients in dozens of international commercial arbitrations, many of which have involved claims in excess of $1 billion.\u0026nbsp; Ben has been involved in securing landmark victories for his clients, including multi-billion dollar wins for ConocoPhillips in its long-running disputes against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and its state-owned oil company PDVSA.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen brings an industry perspective to his practice\u0026nbsp;gained through a secondment to a major multinational company in Singapore early in his career, which involved managing a complex docket of litigation matters throughout South and Southeast Asia and southern Africa.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen has been recognized in the\u0026nbsp;2024 edition of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eLegal 500 United States \u003c/em\u003efor construction, and in\u0026nbsp;2023 was selected\u0026nbsp;by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a Top 40 Under 40 Lawyer and by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRecorder\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a \"Lawyer on the Fast Track.\"\u0026nbsp; Ben was previously selected as a\u0026nbsp;\"Rising Star\" by \u003cem\u003eSuper Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e in 2020 and 2022.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"benjamin-jones","email":"bjones@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eActing for a petrochemical joint venture in connection with a dispute against its earthworks site contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a power generation company in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor involving a 467-megawatt gas-fired combined-cycle power plant\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Latin American state-owned oil refinery in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Brazilian oil and gas company in a dispute against a Brazilian contractor concerning the fabrication of floating production storage and offloading vessels\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Korean distributor in a commercial dispute against its upstream supplier, in which Ben cross-examined a witness in Korean\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for the Sultanate of Oman in defending against investment claims by a Turkish construction company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading private equity fund in parallel ICC arbitrations in a post-purchase M\u0026amp;A dispute against the sellers of shares in a Latin American technology company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading Middle Eastern energy company in parallel PCA-administered arbitration against a national energy company for a total non-performance of a multi-billion dollar gas supply and purchase contract\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading energy company in its resubmitted investment claim against the Venezuelan government\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for ConocoPhillips in parallel ICSID and ICC arbitrations arising from the expropriation of major infrastructure projects in Venezuela, which resulted in multi-billion dollar awards\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":1237,"guid":"1237.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Jones","nick_name":"Benjamin","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Benjamin","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2159,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2010-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"T.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 USA - Construction (2024)"},{"title":"Recognized as a winner in the Lawyers on the Fast Track category","detail":"The Recorder - California Legal Awards, 2023"},{"title":"Named to 40 Under 40 List","detail":"California Daily Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Recognized, with sources describing Ben as \"thorough\"","detail":"Legal 500 for International Arbitration"},{"title":"Recognized as a \"Rising Star\"","detail":"by Super Lawyers in 2020 and 2022"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBenjamin Jones (Ben) focuses his practice on resolving complex business disputes in the construction, energy, and private equity industries.\u0026nbsp;Ben is ranked Band 2 in Chambers for Construction: International Disputes.\u0026nbsp;He has represented owners, sponsors and\u0026nbsp;contractors in disputes arising from dozens of infrastructure projects throughout the United States and internationally.\u0026nbsp;Many of Ben's matters relate to solar, wind, and battery\u0026nbsp;projects; he also has extensive experience with disputes involving\u0026nbsp;power plants, refineries,\u0026nbsp;and manufacturing facilities.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen represents clients in disputes involving a wide range of infrastructure projects, including wind, solar, and battery energy storage system projects, power plants, FPSOs, LNG facilities, data centers, semiconductor manufacturing facilities, and commercial buildings.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen also represents clients in the energy and\u0026nbsp;private equity industries\u0026nbsp;in the resolution of complex business disputes involving Purchase \u0026amp; Sale Agreements, Credit Agreements, Asset Management Agreements, Power Purchase Agreements and LLC Agreements.\u0026nbsp; In addition to formal dispute resolution,\u0026nbsp;Ben dedicates a significant portion of his practice to pre-dispute counseling.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen also regularly represents clients in foreign litigation proceedings.\u0026nbsp; Recently, Ben was part of a team that represented Refineria de Cartagena (Reficar) in defending against multi-jurisdictional restructuring proceedings brought by an award debtor to extinguish Reficar's nearly $1.3 billion arbitration award, and Ben played a key role in securing courtroom victories that resulting in Reficar obtaining a package worth approximately $900 million.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Ben also represented one of the world's largest energy companies in successfully\u0026nbsp;defending against dozens of environmental lawsuits filed in Indonesian courts.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThroughout the course of his career, Ben has represented energy-sector clients in dozens of international commercial arbitrations, many of which have involved claims in excess of $1 billion.\u0026nbsp; Ben has been involved in securing landmark victories for his clients, including multi-billion dollar wins for ConocoPhillips in its long-running disputes against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and its state-owned oil company PDVSA.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen brings an industry perspective to his practice\u0026nbsp;gained through a secondment to a major multinational company in Singapore early in his career, which involved managing a complex docket of litigation matters throughout South and Southeast Asia and southern Africa.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBen has been recognized in the\u0026nbsp;2024 edition of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eLegal 500 United States \u003c/em\u003efor construction, and in\u0026nbsp;2023 was selected\u0026nbsp;by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a Top 40 Under 40 Lawyer and by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRecorder\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a \"Lawyer on the Fast Track.\"\u0026nbsp; Ben was previously selected as a\u0026nbsp;\"Rising Star\" by \u003cem\u003eSuper Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e in 2020 and 2022.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eActing for a petrochemical joint venture in connection with a dispute against its earthworks site contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a power generation company in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor involving a 467-megawatt gas-fired combined-cycle power plant\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Latin American state-owned oil refinery in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Brazilian oil and gas company in a dispute against a Brazilian contractor concerning the fabrication of floating production storage and offloading vessels\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a Korean distributor in a commercial dispute against its upstream supplier, in which Ben cross-examined a witness in Korean\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for the Sultanate of Oman in defending against investment claims by a Turkish construction company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading private equity fund in parallel ICC arbitrations in a post-purchase M\u0026amp;A dispute against the sellers of shares in a Latin American technology company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading Middle Eastern energy company in parallel PCA-administered arbitration against a national energy company for a total non-performance of a multi-billion dollar gas supply and purchase contract\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a leading energy company in its resubmitted investment claim against the Venezuelan government\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for ConocoPhillips in parallel ICSID and ICC arbitrations arising from the expropriation of major infrastructure projects in Venezuela, which resulted in multi-billion dollar awards\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 USA - Construction (2024)"},{"title":"Recognized as a winner in the Lawyers on the Fast Track category","detail":"The Recorder - California Legal Awards, 2023"},{"title":"Named to 40 Under 40 List","detail":"California Daily Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Recognized, with sources describing Ben as \"thorough\"","detail":"Legal 500 for International Arbitration"},{"title":"Recognized as a \"Rising Star\"","detail":"by Super Lawyers in 2020 and 2022"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":7525}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-23T08:57:00.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-23T08:57:00.000Z","searchable_text":"Jones{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 USA - Construction (2024)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a winner in the Lawyers on the Fast Track category\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Recorder - California Legal Awards, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to 40 Under 40 List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"California Daily Journal, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized, with sources describing Ben as \\\"thorough\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 for International Arbitration\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a \\\"Rising Star\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"by Super Lawyers in 2020 and 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}Acting for a petrochemical joint venture in connection with a dispute against its earthworks site contractor{{ FIELD }}Acting for a power generation company in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor involving a 467-megawatt gas-fired combined-cycle power plant{{ FIELD }}Acting for a Latin American state-owned oil refinery in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor{{ FIELD }}Acting for a Brazilian oil and gas company in a dispute against a Brazilian contractor concerning the fabrication of floating production storage and offloading vessels{{ FIELD }}Acting for a Korean distributor in a commercial dispute against its upstream supplier, in which Ben cross-examined a witness in Korean{{ FIELD }}Acting for the Sultanate of Oman in defending against investment claims by a Turkish construction company{{ FIELD }}Acting for a leading private equity fund in parallel ICC arbitrations in a post-purchase M\u0026amp;A dispute against the sellers of shares in a Latin American technology company{{ FIELD }}Acting for a leading Middle Eastern energy company in parallel PCA-administered arbitration against a national energy company for a total non-performance of a multi-billion dollar gas supply and purchase contract{{ FIELD }}Acting for a leading energy company in its resubmitted investment claim against the Venezuelan government{{ FIELD }}Acting for ConocoPhillips in parallel ICSID and ICC arbitrations arising from the expropriation of major infrastructure projects in Venezuela, which resulted in multi-billion dollar awards{{ FIELD }}Benjamin Jones (Ben) focuses his practice on resolving complex business disputes in the construction, energy, and private equity industries. Ben is ranked Band 2 in Chambers for Construction: International Disputes. He has represented owners, sponsors and contractors in disputes arising from dozens of infrastructure projects throughout the United States and internationally. Many of Ben's matters relate to solar, wind, and battery projects; he also has extensive experience with disputes involving power plants, refineries, and manufacturing facilities. \nBen represents clients in disputes involving a wide range of infrastructure projects, including wind, solar, and battery energy storage system projects, power plants, FPSOs, LNG facilities, data centers, semiconductor manufacturing facilities, and commercial buildings.   \nBen also represents clients in the energy and private equity industries in the resolution of complex business disputes involving Purchase \u0026amp; Sale Agreements, Credit Agreements, Asset Management Agreements, Power Purchase Agreements and LLC Agreements.  In addition to formal dispute resolution, Ben dedicates a significant portion of his practice to pre-dispute counseling.   \nBen also regularly represents clients in foreign litigation proceedings.  Recently, Ben was part of a team that represented Refineria de Cartagena (Reficar) in defending against multi-jurisdictional restructuring proceedings brought by an award debtor to extinguish Reficar's nearly $1.3 billion arbitration award, and Ben played a key role in securing courtroom victories that resulting in Reficar obtaining a package worth approximately $900 million.   Ben also represented one of the world's largest energy companies in successfully defending against dozens of environmental lawsuits filed in Indonesian courts.    \nThroughout the course of his career, Ben has represented energy-sector clients in dozens of international commercial arbitrations, many of which have involved claims in excess of $1 billion.  Ben has been involved in securing landmark victories for his clients, including multi-billion dollar wins for ConocoPhillips in its long-running disputes against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and its state-owned oil company PDVSA.   \nBen brings an industry perspective to his practice gained through a secondment to a major multinational company in Singapore early in his career, which involved managing a complex docket of litigation matters throughout South and Southeast Asia and southern Africa. \nBen has been recognized in the 2024 edition of The Legal 500 United States for construction, and in 2023 was selected by the Daily Journal as a Top 40 Under 40 Lawyer and by the Recorder as a \"Lawyer on the Fast Track.\"  Ben was previously selected as a \"Rising Star\" by Super Lawyers in 2020 and 2022. Partner Recommended Lawyer Legal 500 USA - Construction (2024) Recognized as a winner in the Lawyers on the Fast Track category The Recorder - California Legal Awards, 2023 Named to 40 Under 40 List California Daily Journal, 2023 Recognized, with sources describing Ben as \"thorough\" Legal 500 for International Arbitration Recognized as a \"Rising Star\" by Super Lawyers in 2020 and 2022 Brown University  University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley, School of Law California District of Columbia Acting for a petrochemical joint venture in connection with a dispute against its earthworks site contractor Acting for a power generation company in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor involving a 467-megawatt gas-fired combined-cycle power plant Acting for a Latin American state-owned oil refinery in a multi-billion dollar dispute against its EPC contractor Acting for a Brazilian oil and gas company in a dispute against a Brazilian contractor concerning the fabrication of floating production storage and offloading vessels Acting for a Korean distributor in a commercial dispute against its upstream supplier, in which Ben cross-examined a witness in Korean Acting for the Sultanate of Oman in defending against investment claims by a Turkish construction company Acting for a leading private equity fund in parallel ICC arbitrations in a post-purchase M\u0026amp;A dispute against the sellers of shares in a Latin American technology company Acting for a leading Middle Eastern energy company in parallel PCA-administered arbitration against a national energy company for a total non-performance of a multi-billion dollar gas supply and purchase contract Acting for a leading energy company in its resubmitted investment claim against the Venezuelan government Acting for ConocoPhillips in parallel ICSID and ICC arbitrations arising from the expropriation of major infrastructure projects in Venezuela, which resulted in multi-billion dollar awards","searchable_name":"Benjamin T. Jones","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":446316,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5940,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eCaroline Jozefczyk\u0026nbsp;is an associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes group in the Denver office. She represents industry-leading corporations in a wide range of complex litigation, including pharmaceutical, environmental, and toxic tort matters. She is licensed to practice in Colorado and Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"caroline-jozefczyk","email":"cjozefczyk@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Jozefczyk","nick_name":"Caroline","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Caroline","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[{"id":2190,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":75,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eCaroline Jozefczyk\u0026nbsp;is an associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes group in the Denver office. She represents industry-leading corporations in a wide range of complex litigation, including pharmaceutical, environmental, and toxic tort matters. She is licensed to practice in Colorado and Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9126}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-02T21:59:41.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-02T21:59:41.000Z","searchable_text":"Jozefczyk{{ FIELD }}Caroline Jozefczyk is an associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes group in the Denver office. She represents industry-leading corporations in a wide range of complex litigation, including pharmaceutical, environmental, and toxic tort matters. She is licensed to practice in Colorado and Georgia. Senior Associate University of Georgia University of Georgia School of Law University of Georgia University of Georgia School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Colorado Georgia Court of Appeals of Georgia","searchable_name":"Caroline Jozefczyk","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":445213,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6946,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNatalia Jaramillo Sfeir advises on complex international disputes through arbitration, and litigation, with a focus on high-stakes cases in the construction, energy, and infrastructure sectors. She has significant experience representing\u0026nbsp;clients in multi-million dollar disputes, navigating complex regulatory frameworks and cross-border legal challenges.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe has advised on proceedings before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), and UNCITRAL rules, among others, and\u0026nbsp;diverse courts. Her experience spans various sectors, including construction, energy, infrastructure, mining, aviation, and financial services.\u003cbr /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eIn addition to international arbitration matters, Natalia also has experience advising multinational corporations in high-stakes and complex international litigations and regulatory matters across multiple jurisdictions.\u0026nbsp;She brings a strategic approach to dispute resolution, with particular attention to clients' business objectives and industry-specific concerns.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"natalia-jaramillo","email":"njaramillo@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eThe controlling shareholder in two UNCITRAL proceedings over disputes related to a toll road concession.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eInsurance company as claimants in an UNCITRAL arbitration against a Latin American state in connection with the nationalization of the country\u0026rsquo;s pension fund system.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA mining company in an ICSID arbitration in against a Latin American state over the impact of environmental regulations.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e*Matters from prior experience.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":111,"guid":"111.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":131,"guid":"131.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Jaramillo","nick_name":"Natalia","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Natalia","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2236,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2020-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null},{"id":2236,"meta":{"degree":"LL.M.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2020-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":2,"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\u003eNatalia Jaramillo Sfeir advises on complex international disputes through arbitration, and litigation, with a focus on high-stakes cases in the construction, energy, and infrastructure sectors. She has significant experience representing\u0026nbsp;clients in multi-million dollar disputes, navigating complex regulatory frameworks and cross-border legal challenges.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe has advised on proceedings before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), and UNCITRAL rules, among others, and\u0026nbsp;diverse courts. Her experience spans various sectors, including construction, energy, infrastructure, mining, aviation, and financial services.\u003cbr /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eIn addition to international arbitration matters, Natalia also has experience advising multinational corporations in high-stakes and complex international litigations and regulatory matters across multiple jurisdictions.\u0026nbsp;She brings a strategic approach to dispute resolution, with particular attention to clients' business objectives and industry-specific concerns.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eThe controlling shareholder in two UNCITRAL proceedings over disputes related to a toll road concession.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eInsurance company as claimants in an UNCITRAL arbitration against a Latin American state in connection with the nationalization of the country\u0026rsquo;s pension fund system.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA mining company in an ICSID arbitration in against a Latin American state over the impact of environmental regulations.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e*Matters from prior experience.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12632}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-22T21:29:43.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-22T21:29:43.000Z","searchable_text":"Jaramillo{{ FIELD }}The controlling shareholder in two UNCITRAL proceedings over disputes related to a toll road concession.*{{ FIELD }}Insurance company as claimants in an UNCITRAL arbitration against a Latin American state in connection with the nationalization of the country’s pension fund system.*{{ FIELD }}A mining company in an ICSID arbitration in against a Latin American state over the impact of environmental regulations.*{{ FIELD }}*Matters from prior experience.{{ FIELD }}Natalia Jaramillo Sfeir advises on complex international disputes through arbitration, and litigation, with a focus on high-stakes cases in the construction, energy, and infrastructure sectors. She has significant experience representing clients in multi-million dollar disputes, navigating complex regulatory frameworks and cross-border legal challenges. \nShe has advised on proceedings before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), and UNCITRAL rules, among others, and diverse courts. Her experience spans various sectors, including construction, energy, infrastructure, mining, aviation, and financial services.In addition to international arbitration matters, Natalia also has experience advising multinational corporations in high-stakes and complex international litigations and regulatory matters across multiple jurisdictions. She brings a strategic approach to dispute resolution, with particular attention to clients' business objectives and industry-specific concerns. Associate Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law University of Miami University of Miami School of Law University of Miami University of Miami School of Law U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida District of Columbia Florida Colombian-American Bar Association Young MIAS The controlling shareholder in two UNCITRAL proceedings over disputes related to a toll road concession.* Insurance company as claimants in an UNCITRAL arbitration against a Latin American state in connection with the nationalization of the country’s pension fund system.* A mining company in an ICSID arbitration in against a Latin American state over the impact of environmental regulations.* *Matters from prior experience.","searchable_name":"Natalia Jaramillo","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}]}}