{"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":"Activist Defense","value":72},{"name":"Capital Markets","value":26},{"name":"Construction and Procurement","value":40},{"name":"Corporate Governance","value":27},{"name":"Emerging Companies and Venture Capital","value":80},{"name":"Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation","value":28},{"name":"Energy and Infrastructure Projects","value":35},{"name":"Financial Restructuring","value":10},{"name":"Fund Finance","value":134},{"name":"Global Human Capital and Compliance ","value":121},{"name":"Investment Funds and Asset Management","value":78},{"name":"Leveraged Finance","value":29},{"name":"Mergers and Acquisitions (M\u0026A)","value":32},{"name":"Middle East and Islamic Finance and Investment","value":31},{"name":"Private Equity","value":33},{"name":"Public Companies","value":126},{"name":"Real Estate","value":36},{"name":"Structured Finance and Securitization","value":82},{"name":"Tax","value":37},{"name":"Technology Transactions","value":115},{"name":"Government Matters","value":"cg-2"},{"name":"Antitrust","value":1},{"name":"Data, Privacy and Security","value":6},{"name":"Environmental, Health and Safety","value":71},{"name":"FDA and Life Sciences","value":21},{"name":"Government Advocacy and Public Policy","value":23},{"name":"Government Contracts","value":116},{"name":"Healthcare","value":24},{"name":"Innovation Protection","value":135},{"name":"International Trade","value":25},{"name":"National Security and Corporate Espionage","value":110},{"name":"Securities Enforcement and Regulation","value":20},{"name":"Special Matters and Government Investigations","value":11},{"name":"Trial and Global Disputes","value":"cg-3"},{"name":"Antitrust ","value":129},{"name":"Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law","value":2},{"name":"Bankruptcy and Insolvency Litigation","value":38},{"name":"Class Action Defense","value":3},{"name":"Commercial Litigation","value":5},{"name":"Corporate and Securities Litigation","value":19},{"name":"E-Discovery","value":7},{"name":"Global Construction and Infrastructure Disputes","value":4},{"name":"Innovation Protection","value":136},{"name":"Intellectual Property","value":13},{"name":"International Arbitration and Litigation","value":14},{"name":"Labor and Employment","value":15},{"name":"Product Liability","value":17},{"name":"Professional Liability","value":18},{"name":"Toxic \u0026 Environmental Torts","value":16},{"name":"Industries / Issues","value":"cg-4"},{"name":"Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning","value":133},{"name":"Automotive, Transportation and Mobility","value":106},{"name":"Buy American","value":124},{"name":"Crisis Management","value":111},{"name":"Doing Business in Latin America","value":132},{"name":"Energy Transition","value":131},{"name":"Energy","value":102},{"name":"Environmental Agenda","value":125},{"name":"Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG)","value":127},{"name":"Financial Services","value":107},{"name":"Focus on Women's Health","value":112},{"name":"Food and Beverage","value":105},{"name":"Higher Education","value":109},{"name":"Life Sciences and Healthcare","value":103},{"name":"Russia/Ukraine","value":128},{"name":"Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs)","value":123},{"name":"Technology","value":118}]},"title_id":null,"school_id":null,"office_id":"2","capability_id":null,"extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"B","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":442789,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5487,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eStephen Baskin is a partner on the Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation team. Steve co-leads the Intellectual Property group and the Firm's Technology Industry Initiative. With over 25\u0026nbsp;years of experience, Steve is a first-chair trial lawyer with substantial experience representing technology companies in patent litigation, licensing and trade secret disputes, and other complex matters in District Court and the International Trade Commission. His litigation and trial experience is broad and has included the representation of some of the largest and most well-known companies, including airlines, financial services institutions, manufacturing, technology, telecommunications and consumer products companies.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve leads all types of patent litigation cases, with a results-oriented approach that is focused on achieving the client\u0026rsquo;s overall desired result, which he understands can vary case by case. He also spends considerable time counseling clients in pre-litigation matters, analyzing patents and related technology in either defending allegations or conducting due diligence in potential offensive actions for clients. Steve is currently advising clients in several matters involving technical areas, such as the use of RFID and related technology; the use of website functionality directed to features involving search criteria and functions related to specific industries; technology related to telecommunications systems involving cellular and wifi functionality including relevant standards; and a case involving specific types of methods and systems for securing computer systems avoiding malware and related threats. He also participated in a month-long arbitration for a client involving standard essential patents directed to specific telecommunication standards and functions, and is representing a substantial technology company involving ATM functionality and mobile communications allowing for authentication and mobile check deposit functionality.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve has been recognized as a leading intellectual property lawyer by Chambers USA and is recommended by IAM Patent 1000 for patent litigation noting that Steve is \u0026ldquo;[A]ggressive yet affable, [S]teve is a great storyteller in the courtroom. Judges like him.\u0026rdquo; In common with his colleagues, \u0026ldquo;he works exceptionally hard and is highly effective\u0026rdquo;; and was listed as a DC Super Lawyer for Intellectual Property Litigation for five consecutive years. He has also been named each year since 2013 as one of the \u0026ldquo;[T]op 100: Washington DC Super Lawyers \u0026ldquo; by Super Lawyers and has been identified as one of Washington, DC's \"Best Lawyers\" by Washingtonian Magazine.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve is also very involved in the community and public affairs. He serves as Council Member for the Corporate Area Board for the American Cancer Society and serves as a Board of Director for Thanks USA.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"stephen-baskin","email":"sbaskin@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital v. Illumina, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del). Lead counsel in representation of Nationwide Children's Hospital, a major pediatric research center, in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,552,458 related to methods for improving the processing of genetic sequence data.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Smart Televisions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e, Inv. No. 337-TA-1420, representing respondent TCL Electronics Holding, Ltd. et al. (\u0026ldquo;TCL\u0026rdquo;). Case favorably settled for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEncore Wire Corporation v. Southwire Company, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in representation of Encore Wire Corporation in patent infringement lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas involving 18 patents covering five distinct products at issue. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCraig Alexander v. a major international airline\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(GA: DeKalb Country State Court)\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eRepresenting a major international airline in a lawsuit brought by an employee alleging that our client misappropriated trade secrets through our client\u0026rsquo;s development of an enterprise text-based communications tool.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eHand Held Products, Inc. et. al. v. TransCore, LP et. al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.Del). Lead counsel in representation of TransCore in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of multiple patents. TransCore was sued by two subsidiaries of Honeywell alleging infringement of nine patents, breach of a 2008 License Agreement, and fraud for failure to pay royalties under the License Agreement. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(N.D.Ga.). Lead counsel in representation of Cox Communications in a patent litigation matter. Fleet Connect alleges that Cox's WiFi gateways, extenders, and related products infringe seven of its patents related to wireless communications technologies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.) (W.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing Peloton in a patent litigation matter against Fleet Connect Solutions. Fleet Connect alleges Peloton\u0026rsquo;s products infringe seven patents related to WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity. We successfully obtained a motion to transfer out of W.D.T.X., to S.D.N.Y.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSunStone Information Defense, Inc. v. F5, Inc\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(N.D.Cal.). Represented F5, Inc. and Capital One in an alleged infringement of three patents. Obtained stay of Capital One and successfully transferred case from EDVA to NDCA. At claim construction, the Court held several terms found in each of the asserted claims to be indefinite, thereby rendering the claims invalid.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEncore Wire Corporation v. Copperweld Bimetallics, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(E.D.Tex.). Represented Encore Wire Corporation in Lanham Act false advertising and antitrust litigation, which culminated in favorable settlements and dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSymbology Innovations LLC v. a major international airline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Symbology Innovations, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff claims our client infringed on three of its patents related to systems and methods for enabling portable electronic devices to retrieve information about an object using visual detection of symbols like QR codes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIntellectual Ventures I LLC et. al. v. General Motors Company et. al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in defense of General Motors Company and General Motors LLC (\u0026ldquo;GM\u0026rdquo;) in the W.D. Texas in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, which alleged that GM infringed one or more claims of 12 U.S. patents. The patents span a wide range of subject matter and technologies, including wireless communication systems, intelligent networks, digital cameras, navigational systems, and GPS devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmtech Systems, LLC v. Kapsch USA, et. al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(International Trade Commission). Lead counsel representing Amtech Systems, a U.S. manufacturer and distributor of RFID readers and transponders used on toll roads to monitor vehicle traffic and charge tolls, involving a six-patent section 337 complaint directed towards RFID devices imported, sold for importation or sold after importation by a number of Kapsch entities.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCertain RFID Devices\u003c/em\u003e, Inv. No. 337-TA-1234.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSoundView Innovations v. a major international airline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(District of Delaware). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent dispute with Sound View Innovations, which owns a substantial patent portfolio originally developed by computer science researchers at Lucent Technologies. Sound View asserted several of those patents against our client and other industry participants who have deployed certain open source technologies related to large-scale computing platforms. After extensive fact and expert discovery, the case was dismissed with prejudice following our client\u0026rsquo;s setting forth several non-infringement and invalidity defenses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLighthouse Consulting Group, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(WDTX; EDTX; D.N.J.). Represented NCR Corporation and several financial institutions, including Bank of America, BB\u0026amp;T and SunTrust (Truist),Capital One, Citigroup, Citizens, Morgan Stanley, and PNC against patent infringement claims directed to mobile check deposit technology. Following the filing of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Judge Albright ruled that Lighthouse's claims against BB\u0026amp;T inappropriately relied on the doctrine of equivalents to allege that a mobile app was equivalent to a physical device allegedly operating in a similar way. Lighthouse dismissed the remaining cases against the other financial institutions following Judge Albright\u0026rsquo;s decision.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Lead counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Lead counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSharpe Innovations, Inc. v. Cricket Wireless LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Virginia). Representing Cricket Wireless in a patent infringement matter in the Eastern District of Virginia involving patents related to micro SIM card adaptors. IPEG LLC v. Valley National Bank (District of New Jersey). Represented Valley National Bank and NCR Corporation in a matter involving banking on a mobile device.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, INC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSymbology Innovations, LLC v. JetBlue Airways Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented JetBlue Airways in the Eastern District of Texas in a matter related to systems and methods of presenting information about an object on a portable electronic device, such as QR Codes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines, and another Major International Airline against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eParallel Iron v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing Google in patent infringement action against Parallel Iron in the D. of Delaware where the Google File System was accused of infringing multiple patents. Parallel Iron, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00367 (D. Del., filed March 6, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System was accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. a major international airline. and US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing a major international airline\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eand US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. a major international airline\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eNo. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eWalker Digital LLC v. American Airlines Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Representing a major international airline against Walker Digital LLC. Walker Digital filed its complaint against ten defendants (which includes American Airlines, Best Buy Co., Dell, Inc., and Sony Electronics,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware asserting infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,138,105 and 6,601,036. The Asserted Patents are directed to systems and methods for managing the sale of a group of products using sales performance data and/or inventory data of the products included in the group. (Judge Sleet).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWalker Digital, LLC v. American Airlines, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-00320 (D. Del. filed April 11, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Representing Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInnova Patent Licensing LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Wells Fargo Bank against Innova Patent Licensing in a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue includes information security technologies such as spam-blocking software. The plaintiff in this suit sued numerous defendants, including some of the largest banks in the country. Case settled. (Judge Folsom).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eInNova v. 3Com Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2:10-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex., filed July 20, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The case was originally filed in the Eastern District of Virginia but was successfully transferred to Iowa where the bulk of Wells Fargo's home mortgage division resides. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue include customer service and payment acceptance technologies.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:10-cv-00202 (S.D. Iowa filed April 30, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAtlas Brace Technologies USA LLC v. Leatt Corporation and DOES 1-10, Inclusive\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Leatt Corporation in the Central District of California. Atlas Brace Technologies filed an action in the Central District of California for declaratory judgment against Leatt to determine infringement of Leatt's two patents directed to protective neck braces, which prevent injury to athletes performing in various sports, including motocross. Leatt filed counterclaims for infringement of the two patents against Atlas Brace's protective neck brace, the Atlas Neck Brace, which is also used by motocross and other athletes.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAtlas Brace Technologies USA, LLC v. Leatt Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2:11-cv-09973 (C.D. Cal., filed December 1, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC (formerly LVL Patent Group, LLC) v. United Airlines, U.S. Airways, and Air Canada\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines, U.S. Airways and Air Canada in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of form transactions that transmit data from a form presented to a user, including customer travel managements systems, which allegedly includes kiosks and network services platform. (Judge Robinson).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-00834 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyberFone Systems LLC v. Amazon.com, et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems, LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of obtaining data transaction information and forming a plurality of data transactions for the single transaction and sending the data to different destinations, using a mobile services network platform.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC v. American Airlines\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:11-cv-00831 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMicrolog Corp. v. Continental Airlines Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented United Airlines and NCR Corporation in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas relating to contact center system software for handling multiple media types.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMicrolog Corp. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:10-cv-00260 (E.D. Tex. filed May 21, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGarnet Digital LLC Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended AT\u0026amp;T in the Eastern District of Texas. Garnet Digital filed a case against mobile device manufacturers and carriers alleging infringement through the use and/or sale of a \"telecommunications device,\" that is coupled to television displays or television receivers, for creating an interactive display terminal and accessing information stored in a \"remote computerized database\" using a \"communications exchange,\" and methods for using the same. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGarnet Digital, LLC Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, No. 6:11-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. filed December 2, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLeon Stambler v. Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Texas where the plaintiff asserted that its patents covered secure online transactions. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eStambler v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:11-cv-00460 (E.D. Tex. filed September 6, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMacroSolve Inc. v. United Airlines Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines in patent infringement case where MacroSolve has accused the United Airline's use of a mobile services network platform and corresponding date processing systems, and, in particular, the mobile application \"United Airlines Mobile app.\" of infringing one or more claims of the '816 patent. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMacroSolve, Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:11-cv-00694 (E.D. Tex. filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. v. BB\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended BB\u0026amp;T against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The infringement allegations are directed to BB\u0026amp;T systems, services and processes for accepting check payments over the phone.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePollin Patent Licensing, LLC, et al. v. BB\u0026amp;T Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 5:12-cv-00022 (E.D.N.C., filed January 13, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eA major international airline v. Applied Interact LLC \u0026amp; Quest Nettech Corp\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. (D.Del.). Brought action for a Declaratory Judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Applied Interact LLC after the major international airline rejected Applied Interact's license request. This action sought a declaration that the three patents-in-suit were invalid and not infringed. Quest Net Tech (\"Quest\") subsequently acquired the rights to the patents from Applied Interact and the complaint was amended to include Quest. The case was dismissed after we secured a favorable settlement agreement on behalf of our client. (Judge Robinson). a major international airline v. Applied Interact, LLC, No. 1:09-cv-00941 (D. Del., filed December 8, 2009).\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1240,"guid":"1240.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"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"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Baskin","nick_name":"Steve","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Stephen","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":345,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1995-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"E.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"\"A great client-oriented attorney\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"\"he's very quick to respond and doesn't overpromise or provide advice which runs counter to bottom line interest.\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"Ranked “Patent 1000”","detail":"Intellectual Asset Management"},{"title":"Named “Super Lawyer” for Intellectual Property Litigation","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers"},{"title":"Listed “Top 100 Super Lawyers”","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2013 – Present"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Best Lawyer”","detail":"Washingtonian Magazine"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eStephen Baskin is a partner on the Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation team. Steve co-leads the Intellectual Property group and the Firm's Technology Industry Initiative. With over 25\u0026nbsp;years of experience, Steve is a first-chair trial lawyer with substantial experience representing technology companies in patent litigation, licensing and trade secret disputes, and other complex matters in District Court and the International Trade Commission. His litigation and trial experience is broad and has included the representation of some of the largest and most well-known companies, including airlines, financial services institutions, manufacturing, technology, telecommunications and consumer products companies.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve leads all types of patent litigation cases, with a results-oriented approach that is focused on achieving the client\u0026rsquo;s overall desired result, which he understands can vary case by case. He also spends considerable time counseling clients in pre-litigation matters, analyzing patents and related technology in either defending allegations or conducting due diligence in potential offensive actions for clients. Steve is currently advising clients in several matters involving technical areas, such as the use of RFID and related technology; the use of website functionality directed to features involving search criteria and functions related to specific industries; technology related to telecommunications systems involving cellular and wifi functionality including relevant standards; and a case involving specific types of methods and systems for securing computer systems avoiding malware and related threats. He also participated in a month-long arbitration for a client involving standard essential patents directed to specific telecommunication standards and functions, and is representing a substantial technology company involving ATM functionality and mobile communications allowing for authentication and mobile check deposit functionality.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve has been recognized as a leading intellectual property lawyer by Chambers USA and is recommended by IAM Patent 1000 for patent litigation noting that Steve is \u0026ldquo;[A]ggressive yet affable, [S]teve is a great storyteller in the courtroom. Judges like him.\u0026rdquo; In common with his colleagues, \u0026ldquo;he works exceptionally hard and is highly effective\u0026rdquo;; and was listed as a DC Super Lawyer for Intellectual Property Litigation for five consecutive years. He has also been named each year since 2013 as one of the \u0026ldquo;[T]op 100: Washington DC Super Lawyers \u0026ldquo; by Super Lawyers and has been identified as one of Washington, DC's \"Best Lawyers\" by Washingtonian Magazine.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve is also very involved in the community and public affairs. He serves as Council Member for the Corporate Area Board for the American Cancer Society and serves as a Board of Director for Thanks USA.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital v. Illumina, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del). Lead counsel in representation of Nationwide Children's Hospital, a major pediatric research center, in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,552,458 related to methods for improving the processing of genetic sequence data.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Smart Televisions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e, Inv. No. 337-TA-1420, representing respondent TCL Electronics Holding, Ltd. et al. (\u0026ldquo;TCL\u0026rdquo;). Case favorably settled for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEncore Wire Corporation v. Southwire Company, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in representation of Encore Wire Corporation in patent infringement lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas involving 18 patents covering five distinct products at issue. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCraig Alexander v. a major international airline\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(GA: DeKalb Country State Court)\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eRepresenting a major international airline in a lawsuit brought by an employee alleging that our client misappropriated trade secrets through our client\u0026rsquo;s development of an enterprise text-based communications tool.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eHand Held Products, Inc. et. al. v. TransCore, LP et. al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.Del). Lead counsel in representation of TransCore in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of multiple patents. TransCore was sued by two subsidiaries of Honeywell alleging infringement of nine patents, breach of a 2008 License Agreement, and fraud for failure to pay royalties under the License Agreement. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(N.D.Ga.). Lead counsel in representation of Cox Communications in a patent litigation matter. Fleet Connect alleges that Cox's WiFi gateways, extenders, and related products infringe seven of its patents related to wireless communications technologies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.) (W.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing Peloton in a patent litigation matter against Fleet Connect Solutions. Fleet Connect alleges Peloton\u0026rsquo;s products infringe seven patents related to WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity. We successfully obtained a motion to transfer out of W.D.T.X., to S.D.N.Y.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSunStone Information Defense, Inc. v. F5, Inc\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(N.D.Cal.). Represented F5, Inc. and Capital One in an alleged infringement of three patents. Obtained stay of Capital One and successfully transferred case from EDVA to NDCA. At claim construction, the Court held several terms found in each of the asserted claims to be indefinite, thereby rendering the claims invalid.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEncore Wire Corporation v. Copperweld Bimetallics, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(E.D.Tex.). Represented Encore Wire Corporation in Lanham Act false advertising and antitrust litigation, which culminated in favorable settlements and dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSymbology Innovations LLC v. a major international airline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Symbology Innovations, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff claims our client infringed on three of its patents related to systems and methods for enabling portable electronic devices to retrieve information about an object using visual detection of symbols like QR codes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIntellectual Ventures I LLC et. al. v. General Motors Company et. al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in defense of General Motors Company and General Motors LLC (\u0026ldquo;GM\u0026rdquo;) in the W.D. Texas in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, which alleged that GM infringed one or more claims of 12 U.S. patents. The patents span a wide range of subject matter and technologies, including wireless communication systems, intelligent networks, digital cameras, navigational systems, and GPS devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmtech Systems, LLC v. Kapsch USA, et. al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(International Trade Commission). Lead counsel representing Amtech Systems, a U.S. manufacturer and distributor of RFID readers and transponders used on toll roads to monitor vehicle traffic and charge tolls, involving a six-patent section 337 complaint directed towards RFID devices imported, sold for importation or sold after importation by a number of Kapsch entities.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCertain RFID Devices\u003c/em\u003e, Inv. No. 337-TA-1234.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSoundView Innovations v. a major international airline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(District of Delaware). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent dispute with Sound View Innovations, which owns a substantial patent portfolio originally developed by computer science researchers at Lucent Technologies. Sound View asserted several of those patents against our client and other industry participants who have deployed certain open source technologies related to large-scale computing platforms. After extensive fact and expert discovery, the case was dismissed with prejudice following our client\u0026rsquo;s setting forth several non-infringement and invalidity defenses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLighthouse Consulting Group, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(WDTX; EDTX; D.N.J.). Represented NCR Corporation and several financial institutions, including Bank of America, BB\u0026amp;T and SunTrust (Truist),Capital One, Citigroup, Citizens, Morgan Stanley, and PNC against patent infringement claims directed to mobile check deposit technology. Following the filing of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Judge Albright ruled that Lighthouse's claims against BB\u0026amp;T inappropriately relied on the doctrine of equivalents to allege that a mobile app was equivalent to a physical device allegedly operating in a similar way. Lighthouse dismissed the remaining cases against the other financial institutions following Judge Albright\u0026rsquo;s decision.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Lead counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Lead counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSharpe Innovations, Inc. v. Cricket Wireless LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Virginia). Representing Cricket Wireless in a patent infringement matter in the Eastern District of Virginia involving patents related to micro SIM card adaptors. IPEG LLC v. Valley National Bank (District of New Jersey). Represented Valley National Bank and NCR Corporation in a matter involving banking on a mobile device.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, INC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSymbology Innovations, LLC v. JetBlue Airways Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented JetBlue Airways in the Eastern District of Texas in a matter related to systems and methods of presenting information about an object on a portable electronic device, such as QR Codes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.Tex.). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines, and another Major International Airline against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eParallel Iron v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing Google in patent infringement action against Parallel Iron in the D. of Delaware where the Google File System was accused of infringing multiple patents. Parallel Iron, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00367 (D. Del., filed March 6, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System was accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. a major international airline. and US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Lead counsel representing a major international airline\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eand US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. a major international airline\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eNo. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eWalker Digital LLC v. American Airlines Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Representing a major international airline against Walker Digital LLC. Walker Digital filed its complaint against ten defendants (which includes American Airlines, Best Buy Co., Dell, Inc., and Sony Electronics,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware asserting infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,138,105 and 6,601,036. The Asserted Patents are directed to systems and methods for managing the sale of a group of products using sales performance data and/or inventory data of the products included in the group. (Judge Sleet).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWalker Digital, LLC v. American Airlines, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-00320 (D. Del. filed April 11, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Representing Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInnova Patent Licensing LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Wells Fargo Bank against Innova Patent Licensing in a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue includes information security technologies such as spam-blocking software. The plaintiff in this suit sued numerous defendants, including some of the largest banks in the country. Case settled. (Judge Folsom).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eInNova v. 3Com Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2:10-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex., filed July 20, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The case was originally filed in the Eastern District of Virginia but was successfully transferred to Iowa where the bulk of Wells Fargo's home mortgage division resides. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue include customer service and payment acceptance technologies.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:10-cv-00202 (S.D. Iowa filed April 30, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAtlas Brace Technologies USA LLC v. Leatt Corporation and DOES 1-10, Inclusive\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Leatt Corporation in the Central District of California. Atlas Brace Technologies filed an action in the Central District of California for declaratory judgment against Leatt to determine infringement of Leatt's two patents directed to protective neck braces, which prevent injury to athletes performing in various sports, including motocross. Leatt filed counterclaims for infringement of the two patents against Atlas Brace's protective neck brace, the Atlas Neck Brace, which is also used by motocross and other athletes.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAtlas Brace Technologies USA, LLC v. Leatt Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2:11-cv-09973 (C.D. Cal., filed December 1, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC (formerly LVL Patent Group, LLC) v. United Airlines, U.S. Airways, and Air Canada\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines, U.S. Airways and Air Canada in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of form transactions that transmit data from a form presented to a user, including customer travel managements systems, which allegedly includes kiosks and network services platform. (Judge Robinson).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-00834 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyberFone Systems LLC v. Amazon.com, et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems, LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of obtaining data transaction information and forming a plurality of data transactions for the single transaction and sending the data to different destinations, using a mobile services network platform.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCyberfone Systems LLC v. American Airlines\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:11-cv-00831 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMicrolog Corp. v. Continental Airlines Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented United Airlines and NCR Corporation in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas relating to contact center system software for handling multiple media types.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMicrolog Corp. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:10-cv-00260 (E.D. Tex. filed May 21, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGarnet Digital LLC Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended AT\u0026amp;T in the Eastern District of Texas. Garnet Digital filed a case against mobile device manufacturers and carriers alleging infringement through the use and/or sale of a \"telecommunications device,\" that is coupled to television displays or television receivers, for creating an interactive display terminal and accessing information stored in a \"remote computerized database\" using a \"communications exchange,\" and methods for using the same. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGarnet Digital, LLC Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, No. 6:11-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. filed December 2, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLeon Stambler v. Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Texas where the plaintiff asserted that its patents covered secure online transactions. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eStambler v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:11-cv-00460 (E.D. Tex. filed September 6, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMacroSolve Inc. v. United Airlines Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended United Airlines in patent infringement case where MacroSolve has accused the United Airline's use of a mobile services network platform and corresponding date processing systems, and, in particular, the mobile application \"United Airlines Mobile app.\" of infringing one or more claims of the '816 patent. (Judge Leonard Davis).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMacroSolve, Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 6:11-cv-00694 (E.D. Tex. filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAutoscribe Corp. v. BB\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended BB\u0026amp;T against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The infringement allegations are directed to BB\u0026amp;T systems, services and processes for accepting check payments over the phone.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePollin Patent Licensing, LLC, et al. v. BB\u0026amp;T Corporation, et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 5:12-cv-00022 (E.D.N.C., filed January 13, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eA major international airline v. Applied Interact LLC \u0026amp; Quest Nettech Corp\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. (D.Del.). Brought action for a Declaratory Judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Applied Interact LLC after the major international airline rejected Applied Interact's license request. This action sought a declaration that the three patents-in-suit were invalid and not infringed. Quest Net Tech (\"Quest\") subsequently acquired the rights to the patents from Applied Interact and the complaint was amended to include Quest. The case was dismissed after we secured a favorable settlement agreement on behalf of our client. (Judge Robinson). a major international airline v. Applied Interact, LLC, No. 1:09-cv-00941 (D. Del., filed December 8, 2009).\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"\"A great client-oriented attorney\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"\"he's very quick to respond and doesn't overpromise or provide advice which runs counter to bottom line interest.\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"Ranked “Patent 1000”","detail":"Intellectual Asset Management"},{"title":"Named “Super Lawyer” for Intellectual Property Litigation","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers"},{"title":"Listed “Top 100 Super Lawyers”","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2013 – Present"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Best Lawyer”","detail":"Washingtonian Magazine"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6942}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-13T04:57:20.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T04:57:20.000Z","searchable_text":"Baskin{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"A great client-oriented attorney\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"he's very quick to respond and doesn't overpromise or provide advice which runs counter to bottom line interest.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked “Patent 1000”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Asset Management\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Super Lawyer” for Intellectual Property Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Listed “Top 100 Super Lawyers”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2013 – Present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a “Best Lawyer”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washingtonian Magazine\"}{{ FIELD }}The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital v. Illumina, Inc. (D. Del). Lead counsel in representation of Nationwide Children's Hospital, a major pediatric research center, in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,552,458 related to methods for improving the processing of genetic sequence data.{{ FIELD }}In the Matter of Certain Smart Televisions, Inv. No. 337-TA-1420, representing respondent TCL Electronics Holding, Ltd. et al. (“TCL”). Case favorably settled for client.{{ FIELD }}Encore Wire Corporation v. Southwire Company, LLC (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in representation of Encore Wire Corporation in patent infringement lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas involving 18 patents covering five distinct products at issue. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.{{ FIELD }}Craig Alexander v. a major international airline (GA: DeKalb Country State Court). Representing a major international airline in a lawsuit brought by an employee alleging that our client misappropriated trade secrets through our client’s development of an enterprise text-based communications tool.{{ FIELD }}Hand Held Products, Inc. et. al. v. TransCore, LP et. al. (D.Del). Lead counsel in representation of TransCore in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of multiple patents. TransCore was sued by two subsidiaries of Honeywell alleging infringement of nine patents, breach of a 2008 License Agreement, and fraud for failure to pay royalties under the License Agreement. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation.{{ FIELD }}Fleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc. (N.D.Ga.). Lead counsel in representation of Cox Communications in a patent litigation matter. Fleet Connect alleges that Cox's WiFi gateways, extenders, and related products infringe seven of its patents related to wireless communications technologies.{{ FIELD }}Fleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) (W.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing Peloton in a patent litigation matter against Fleet Connect Solutions. Fleet Connect alleges Peloton’s products infringe seven patents related to WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity. We successfully obtained a motion to transfer out of W.D.T.X., to S.D.N.Y.{{ FIELD }}SunStone Information Defense, Inc. v. F5, Inc (N.D.Cal.). Represented F5, Inc. and Capital One in an alleged infringement of three patents. Obtained stay of Capital One and successfully transferred case from EDVA to NDCA. At claim construction, the Court held several terms found in each of the asserted claims to be indefinite, thereby rendering the claims invalid.{{ FIELD }}Encore Wire Corporation v. Copperweld Bimetallics, LLC (E.D.Tex.). Represented Encore Wire Corporation in Lanham Act false advertising and antitrust litigation, which culminated in favorable settlements and dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}Symbology Innovations LLC v. a major international airline (N.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Symbology Innovations, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff claims our client infringed on three of its patents related to systems and methods for enabling portable electronic devices to retrieve information about an object using visual detection of symbols like QR codes.{{ FIELD }}Intellectual Ventures I LLC et. al. v. General Motors Company et. al. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in defense of General Motors Company and General Motors LLC (“GM”) in the W.D. Texas in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, which alleged that GM infringed one or more claims of 12 U.S. patents. The patents span a wide range of subject matter and technologies, including wireless communication systems, intelligent networks, digital cameras, navigational systems, and GPS devices.{{ FIELD }}Amtech Systems, LLC v. Kapsch USA, et. al (International Trade Commission). Lead counsel representing Amtech Systems, a U.S. manufacturer and distributor of RFID readers and transponders used on toll roads to monitor vehicle traffic and charge tolls, involving a six-patent section 337 complaint directed towards RFID devices imported, sold for importation or sold after importation by a number of Kapsch entities. Certain RFID Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1234.{{ FIELD }}SoundView Innovations v. a major international airline (District of Delaware). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent dispute with Sound View Innovations, which owns a substantial patent portfolio originally developed by computer science researchers at Lucent Technologies. Sound View asserted several of those patents against our client and other industry participants who have deployed certain open source technologies related to large-scale computing platforms. After extensive fact and expert discovery, the case was dismissed with prejudice following our client’s setting forth several non-infringement and invalidity defenses.{{ FIELD }}Lighthouse Consulting Group, LLC (WDTX; EDTX; D.N.J.). Represented NCR Corporation and several financial institutions, including Bank of America, BB\u0026amp;T and SunTrust (Truist),Capital One, Citigroup, Citizens, Morgan Stanley, and PNC against patent infringement claims directed to mobile check deposit technology. Following the filing of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Judge Albright ruled that Lighthouse's claims against BB\u0026amp;T inappropriately relied on the doctrine of equivalents to allege that a mobile app was equivalent to a physical device allegedly operating in a similar way. Lighthouse dismissed the remaining cases against the other financial institutions following Judge Albright’s decision.{{ FIELD }}Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Lead counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.{{ FIELD }}EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Lead counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.{{ FIELD }}Sharpe Innovations, Inc. v. Cricket Wireless LLC (Eastern District of Virginia). Representing Cricket Wireless in a patent infringement matter in the Eastern District of Virginia involving patents related to micro SIM card adaptors. IPEG LLC v. Valley National Bank (District of New Jersey). Represented Valley National Bank and NCR Corporation in a matter involving banking on a mobile device.{{ FIELD }}NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, INC.{{ FIELD }}Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.{{ FIELD }}St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.{{ FIELD }}Symbology Innovations, LLC v. JetBlue Airways Corporation (Eastern District of Texas). Represented JetBlue Airways in the Eastern District of Texas in a matter related to systems and methods of presenting information about an object on a portable electronic device, such as QR Codes.{{ FIELD }}Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (E.D.Tex.). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.{{ FIELD }}Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines, and another Major International Airline against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.{{ FIELD }}Parallel Iron v. Google. Lead counsel representing Google in patent infringement action against Parallel Iron in the D. of Delaware where the Google File System was accused of infringing multiple patents. Parallel Iron, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00367 (D. Del., filed March 6, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Lead counsel representing Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System was accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Aeritas LLC v. a major international airline. and US Airways. Lead counsel representing a major international airline and US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. a major international airline No. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011); Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Walker Digital LLC v. American Airlines Inc. et al. Representing a major international airline against Walker Digital LLC. Walker Digital filed its complaint against ten defendants (which includes American Airlines, Best Buy Co., Dell, Inc., and Sony Electronics, et al.) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware asserting infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,138,105 and 6,601,036. The Asserted Patents are directed to systems and methods for managing the sale of a group of products using sales performance data and/or inventory data of the products included in the group. (Judge Sleet). Walker Digital, LLC v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-00320 (D. Del. filed April 11, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Representing Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Innova Patent Licensing LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al. Defended Wells Fargo Bank against Innova Patent Licensing in a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue includes information security technologies such as spam-blocking software. The plaintiff in this suit sued numerous defendants, including some of the largest banks in the country. Case settled. (Judge Folsom). InNova v. 3Com Corporation, et al., No. 2:10-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex., filed July 20, 2010).{{ FIELD }}Autoscribe Corp. et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al. Defended against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The case was originally filed in the Eastern District of Virginia but was successfully transferred to Iowa where the bulk of Wells Fargo's home mortgage division resides. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue include customer service and payment acceptance technologies. Autoscribe Corp. et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al., No. 4:10-cv-00202 (S.D. Iowa filed April 30, 2010).{{ FIELD }}Atlas Brace Technologies USA LLC v. Leatt Corporation and DOES 1-10, Inclusive. Represented Leatt Corporation in the Central District of California. Atlas Brace Technologies filed an action in the Central District of California for declaratory judgment against Leatt to determine infringement of Leatt's two patents directed to protective neck braces, which prevent injury to athletes performing in various sports, including motocross. Leatt filed counterclaims for infringement of the two patents against Atlas Brace's protective neck brace, the Atlas Neck Brace, which is also used by motocross and other athletes. Atlas Brace Technologies USA, LLC v. Leatt Corporation, et al., No. 2:11-cv-09973 (C.D. Cal., filed December 1, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Cyberfone Systems LLC (formerly LVL Patent Group, LLC) v. United Airlines, U.S. Airways, and Air Canada. Defended United Airlines, U.S. Airways and Air Canada in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of form transactions that transmit data from a form presented to a user, including customer travel managements systems, which allegedly includes kiosks and network services platform. (Judge Robinson). Cyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation, et al., No. 1:11-cv-00834 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).{{ FIELD }}CyberFone Systems LLC v. Amazon.com, et al. Defended United Airlines in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems, LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of obtaining data transaction information and forming a plurality of data transactions for the single transaction and sending the data to different destinations, using a mobile services network platform. Cyberfone Systems LLC v. American Airlines, No. 1:11-cv-00831 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Microlog Corp. v. Continental Airlines Inc., et al. Represented United Airlines and NCR Corporation in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas relating to contact center system software for handling multiple media types. Microlog Corp. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 6:10-cv-00260 (E.D. Tex. filed May 21, 2010).{{ FIELD }}Garnet Digital LLC Litigation. Defended AT\u0026amp;T in the Eastern District of Texas. Garnet Digital filed a case against mobile device manufacturers and carriers alleging infringement through the use and/or sale of a \"telecommunications device,\" that is coupled to television displays or television receivers, for creating an interactive display terminal and accessing information stored in a \"remote computerized database\" using a \"communications exchange,\" and methods for using the same. (Judge Leonard Davis). Garnet Digital, LLC Litigation, No. 6:11-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. filed December 2, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Leon Stambler v. Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T. Represented Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Texas where the plaintiff asserted that its patents covered secure online transactions. (Judge Leonard Davis). Stambler v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., et al., No. 6:11-cv-00460 (E.D. Tex. filed September 6, 2011).{{ FIELD }}MacroSolve Inc. v. United Airlines Inc. Defended United Airlines in patent infringement case where MacroSolve has accused the United Airline's use of a mobile services network platform and corresponding date processing systems, and, in particular, the mobile application \"United Airlines Mobile app.\" of infringing one or more claims of the '816 patent. (Judge Leonard Davis). MacroSolve, Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc., No. 6:11-cv-00694 (E.D. Tex. filed December 21, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Autoscribe Corp. v. BB\u0026amp;T. Defended BB\u0026amp;T against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The infringement allegations are directed to BB\u0026amp;T systems, services and processes for accepting check payments over the phone. Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, et al. v. BB\u0026amp;T Corporation, et al., No. 5:12-cv-00022 (E.D.N.C., filed January 13, 2012).{{ FIELD }}A major international airline v. Applied Interact LLC \u0026amp; Quest Nettech Corp. (D.Del.). Brought action for a Declaratory Judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Applied Interact LLC after the major international airline rejected Applied Interact's license request. This action sought a declaration that the three patents-in-suit were invalid and not infringed. Quest Net Tech (\"Quest\") subsequently acquired the rights to the patents from Applied Interact and the complaint was amended to include Quest. The case was dismissed after we secured a favorable settlement agreement on behalf of our client. (Judge Robinson). a major international airline v. Applied Interact, LLC, No. 1:09-cv-00941 (D. Del., filed December 8, 2009).{{ FIELD }}Stephen Baskin is a partner on the Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation team. Steve co-leads the Intellectual Property group and the Firm's Technology Industry Initiative. With over 25 years of experience, Steve is a first-chair trial lawyer with substantial experience representing technology companies in patent litigation, licensing and trade secret disputes, and other complex matters in District Court and the International Trade Commission. His litigation and trial experience is broad and has included the representation of some of the largest and most well-known companies, including airlines, financial services institutions, manufacturing, technology, telecommunications and consumer products companies.\nSteve leads all types of patent litigation cases, with a results-oriented approach that is focused on achieving the client’s overall desired result, which he understands can vary case by case. He also spends considerable time counseling clients in pre-litigation matters, analyzing patents and related technology in either defending allegations or conducting due diligence in potential offensive actions for clients. Steve is currently advising clients in several matters involving technical areas, such as the use of RFID and related technology; the use of website functionality directed to features involving search criteria and functions related to specific industries; technology related to telecommunications systems involving cellular and wifi functionality including relevant standards; and a case involving specific types of methods and systems for securing computer systems avoiding malware and related threats. He also participated in a month-long arbitration for a client involving standard essential patents directed to specific telecommunication standards and functions, and is representing a substantial technology company involving ATM functionality and mobile communications allowing for authentication and mobile check deposit functionality. \nSteve has been recognized as a leading intellectual property lawyer by Chambers USA and is recommended by IAM Patent 1000 for patent litigation noting that Steve is “[A]ggressive yet affable, [S]teve is a great storyteller in the courtroom. Judges like him.” In common with his colleagues, “he works exceptionally hard and is highly effective”; and was listed as a DC Super Lawyer for Intellectual Property Litigation for five consecutive years. He has also been named each year since 2013 as one of the “[T]op 100: Washington DC Super Lawyers “ by Super Lawyers and has been identified as one of Washington, DC's \"Best Lawyers\" by Washingtonian Magazine.\nSteve is also very involved in the community and public affairs. He serves as Council Member for the Corporate Area Board for the American Cancer Society and serves as a Board of Director for Thanks USA. Partner \"A great client-oriented attorney\" Chambers USA \"he's very quick to respond and doesn't overpromise or provide advice which runs counter to bottom line interest.\" Chambers USA Ranked “Patent 1000” Intellectual Asset Management Named “Super Lawyer” for Intellectual Property Litigation Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers Listed “Top 100 Super Lawyers” Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2013 – Present Recognized as a “Best Lawyer” Washingtonian Magazine Ohio University  Case Western Reserve University Case Western Reserve University School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 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 Eastern District of Virginia U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia District of Columbia Virginia Chair of Executive Area Board at American Cancer Society Board of Directors at ThanksUSA The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital v. Illumina, Inc. (D. Del). Lead counsel in representation of Nationwide Children's Hospital, a major pediatric research center, in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,552,458 related to methods for improving the processing of genetic sequence data. In the Matter of Certain Smart Televisions, Inv. No. 337-TA-1420, representing respondent TCL Electronics Holding, Ltd. et al. (“TCL”). Case favorably settled for client. Encore Wire Corporation v. Southwire Company, LLC (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in representation of Encore Wire Corporation in patent infringement lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas involving 18 patents covering five distinct products at issue. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation. Craig Alexander v. a major international airline (GA: DeKalb Country State Court). Representing a major international airline in a lawsuit brought by an employee alleging that our client misappropriated trade secrets through our client’s development of an enterprise text-based communications tool. Hand Held Products, Inc. et. al. v. TransCore, LP et. al. (D.Del). Lead counsel in representation of TransCore in a patent infringement suit alleging infringement of multiple patents. TransCore was sued by two subsidiaries of Honeywell alleging infringement of nine patents, breach of a 2008 License Agreement, and fraud for failure to pay royalties under the License Agreement. Case settled favorably for the client in mediation. Fleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc. (N.D.Ga.). Lead counsel in representation of Cox Communications in a patent litigation matter. Fleet Connect alleges that Cox's WiFi gateways, extenders, and related products infringe seven of its patents related to wireless communications technologies. Fleet Connect Solutions LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) (W.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing Peloton in a patent litigation matter against Fleet Connect Solutions. Fleet Connect alleges Peloton’s products infringe seven patents related to WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity. We successfully obtained a motion to transfer out of W.D.T.X., to S.D.N.Y. SunStone Information Defense, Inc. v. F5, Inc (N.D.Cal.). Represented F5, Inc. and Capital One in an alleged infringement of three patents. Obtained stay of Capital One and successfully transferred case from EDVA to NDCA. At claim construction, the Court held several terms found in each of the asserted claims to be indefinite, thereby rendering the claims invalid. Encore Wire Corporation v. Copperweld Bimetallics, LLC (E.D.Tex.). Represented Encore Wire Corporation in Lanham Act false advertising and antitrust litigation, which culminated in favorable settlements and dismissal of all claims. Symbology Innovations LLC v. a major international airline (N.D.Tex.). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Symbology Innovations, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff claims our client infringed on three of its patents related to systems and methods for enabling portable electronic devices to retrieve information about an object using visual detection of symbols like QR codes. Intellectual Ventures I LLC et. al. v. General Motors Company et. al. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel in defense of General Motors Company and General Motors LLC (“GM”) in the W.D. Texas in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, which alleged that GM infringed one or more claims of 12 U.S. patents. The patents span a wide range of subject matter and technologies, including wireless communication systems, intelligent networks, digital cameras, navigational systems, and GPS devices. Amtech Systems, LLC v. Kapsch USA, et. al (International Trade Commission). Lead counsel representing Amtech Systems, a U.S. manufacturer and distributor of RFID readers and transponders used on toll roads to monitor vehicle traffic and charge tolls, involving a six-patent section 337 complaint directed towards RFID devices imported, sold for importation or sold after importation by a number of Kapsch entities. Certain RFID Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1234. SoundView Innovations v. a major international airline (District of Delaware). Lead counsel representing a major international airline in a patent dispute with Sound View Innovations, which owns a substantial patent portfolio originally developed by computer science researchers at Lucent Technologies. Sound View asserted several of those patents against our client and other industry participants who have deployed certain open source technologies related to large-scale computing platforms. After extensive fact and expert discovery, the case was dismissed with prejudice following our client’s setting forth several non-infringement and invalidity defenses. Lighthouse Consulting Group, LLC (WDTX; EDTX; D.N.J.). Represented NCR Corporation and several financial institutions, including Bank of America, BB\u0026amp;T and SunTrust (Truist),Capital One, Citigroup, Citizens, Morgan Stanley, and PNC against patent infringement claims directed to mobile check deposit technology. Following the filing of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Judge Albright ruled that Lighthouse's claims against BB\u0026amp;T inappropriately relied on the doctrine of equivalents to allege that a mobile app was equivalent to a physical device allegedly operating in a similar way. Lighthouse dismissed the remaining cases against the other financial institutions following Judge Albright’s decision. Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Lead counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team. EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Lead counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology. Sharpe Innovations, Inc. v. Cricket Wireless LLC (Eastern District of Virginia). Representing Cricket Wireless in a patent infringement matter in the Eastern District of Virginia involving patents related to micro SIM card adaptors. IPEG LLC v. Valley National Bank (District of New Jersey). Represented Valley National Bank and NCR Corporation in a matter involving banking on a mobile device. NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, INC. Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages. St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction. Symbology Innovations, LLC v. JetBlue Airways Corporation (Eastern District of Texas). Represented JetBlue Airways in the Eastern District of Texas in a matter related to systems and methods of presenting information about an object on a portable electronic device, such as QR Codes. Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (E.D.Tex.). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems. Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (E.D.Tex.). Lead counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines, and another Major International Airline against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds. Parallel Iron v. Google. Lead counsel representing Google in patent infringement action against Parallel Iron in the D. of Delaware where the Google File System was accused of infringing multiple patents. Parallel Iron, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00367 (D. Del., filed March 6, 2013). Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Lead counsel representing Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System was accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013). Aeritas LLC v. a major international airline. and US Airways. Lead counsel representing a major international airline and US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. a major international airline No. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011); Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011). Walker Digital LLC v. American Airlines Inc. et al. Representing a major international airline against Walker Digital LLC. Walker Digital filed its complaint against ten defendants (which includes American Airlines, Best Buy Co., Dell, Inc., and Sony Electronics, et al.) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware asserting infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,138,105 and 6,601,036. The Asserted Patents are directed to systems and methods for managing the sale of a group of products using sales performance data and/or inventory data of the products included in the group. (Judge Sleet). Walker Digital, LLC v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-00320 (D. Del. filed April 11, 2011). Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Representing Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013). Innova Patent Licensing LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al. Defended Wells Fargo Bank against Innova Patent Licensing in a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue includes information security technologies such as spam-blocking software. The plaintiff in this suit sued numerous defendants, including some of the largest banks in the country. Case settled. (Judge Folsom). InNova v. 3Com Corporation, et al., No. 2:10-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex., filed July 20, 2010). Autoscribe Corp. et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al. Defended against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The case was originally filed in the Eastern District of Virginia but was successfully transferred to Iowa where the bulk of Wells Fargo's home mortgage division resides. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue include customer service and payment acceptance technologies. Autoscribe Corp. et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al., No. 4:10-cv-00202 (S.D. Iowa filed April 30, 2010). Atlas Brace Technologies USA LLC v. Leatt Corporation and DOES 1-10, Inclusive. Represented Leatt Corporation in the Central District of California. Atlas Brace Technologies filed an action in the Central District of California for declaratory judgment against Leatt to determine infringement of Leatt's two patents directed to protective neck braces, which prevent injury to athletes performing in various sports, including motocross. Leatt filed counterclaims for infringement of the two patents against Atlas Brace's protective neck brace, the Atlas Neck Brace, which is also used by motocross and other athletes. Atlas Brace Technologies USA, LLC v. Leatt Corporation, et al., No. 2:11-cv-09973 (C.D. Cal., filed December 1, 2011). Cyberfone Systems LLC (formerly LVL Patent Group, LLC) v. United Airlines, U.S. Airways, and Air Canada. Defended United Airlines, U.S. Airways and Air Canada in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of form transactions that transmit data from a form presented to a user, including customer travel managements systems, which allegedly includes kiosks and network services platform. (Judge Robinson). Cyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation, et al., No. 1:11-cv-00834 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011). CyberFone Systems LLC v. Amazon.com, et al. Defended United Airlines in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems, LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of obtaining data transaction information and forming a plurality of data transactions for the single transaction and sending the data to different destinations, using a mobile services network platform. Cyberfone Systems LLC v. American Airlines, No. 1:11-cv-00831 (D. Del. filed September 15, 2011). Microlog Corp. v. Continental Airlines Inc., et al. Represented United Airlines and NCR Corporation in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas relating to contact center system software for handling multiple media types. Microlog Corp. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 6:10-cv-00260 (E.D. Tex. filed May 21, 2010). Garnet Digital LLC Litigation. Defended AT\u0026amp;T in the Eastern District of Texas. Garnet Digital filed a case against mobile device manufacturers and carriers alleging infringement through the use and/or sale of a \"telecommunications device,\" that is coupled to television displays or television receivers, for creating an interactive display terminal and accessing information stored in a \"remote computerized database\" using a \"communications exchange,\" and methods for using the same. (Judge Leonard Davis). Garnet Digital, LLC Litigation, No. 6:11-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. filed December 2, 2011). Leon Stambler v. Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T. Represented Walgreens, Williams-Sonoma, Crate \u0026amp; Barrel and AT\u0026amp;T in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Texas where the plaintiff asserted that its patents covered secure online transactions. (Judge Leonard Davis). Stambler v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., et al., No. 6:11-cv-00460 (E.D. Tex. filed September 6, 2011). MacroSolve Inc. v. United Airlines Inc. Defended United Airlines in patent infringement case where MacroSolve has accused the United Airline's use of a mobile services network platform and corresponding date processing systems, and, in particular, the mobile application \"United Airlines Mobile app.\" of infringing one or more claims of the '816 patent. (Judge Leonard Davis). MacroSolve, Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc., No. 6:11-cv-00694 (E.D. Tex. filed December 21, 2011). Autoscribe Corp. v. BB\u0026amp;T. Defended BB\u0026amp;T against Autoscribe Corporation and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The infringement allegations are directed to BB\u0026amp;T systems, services and processes for accepting check payments over the phone. Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC, et al. v. BB\u0026amp;T Corporation, et al., No. 5:12-cv-00022 (E.D.N.C., filed January 13, 2012). A major international airline v. Applied Interact LLC \u0026amp; Quest Nettech Corp. (D.Del.). Brought action for a Declaratory Judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Applied Interact LLC after the major international airline rejected Applied Interact's license request. This action sought a declaration that the three patents-in-suit were invalid and not infringed. Quest Net Tech (\"Quest\") subsequently acquired the rights to the patents from Applied Interact and the complaint was amended to include Quest. The case was dismissed after we secured a favorable settlement agreement on behalf of our client. (Judge Robinson). a major international airline v. Applied Interact, LLC, No. 1:09-cv-00941 (D. Del., filed December 8, 2009).","searchable_name":"Stephen E. Baskin (Steve)","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":427127,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6357,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKatie Blaszak is a corporate attorney in our Mergers \u0026amp; Acquisitions and Private Equity practices.\u0026nbsp; Katie focuses her practice on advising clients on mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, complex commercial transactions, strategic partnerships, and other general corporate and business matters.\u0026nbsp; Katie has experience in a wide range of verticals, including manufacturing, distribution, telecommunications, mediate and technology sectors, having represented private equity firms and strategic clients in the paper, printing, power, industrials services, broadcast, cable, newspaper, digital media, technology, as well as automotive sectors.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"kathleen-blaszak","email":"kblaszak@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCox Enterprises\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of a majority stake in Cox Media Group's television stations and its Dayton newspaper and radio stations to Apollo Global Management.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUSA Television\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of 11 television stations to Allen Media Broadcasting, a unit of Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios, for $305 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge mobility company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the creation of mobility subscription service joint venture.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ecable company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment in a fiber-optic network services provider.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge communications\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;company in its investment in and subsequent sale of such investment in a private tower and communications site company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its acquisition of a residential gas distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge media company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge media company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Florida.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebroadcast group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the acquisition of a television station in Huntsville, Alabama.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of its managed infrastructure as service solution portfolio company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eautomotive solutions provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its acquisition of aftermarket technology solutions company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge automotive solutions provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment and strategic alliance with an automotive inspections solutions company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUK based company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment in an ADSB air traffic surveillance service.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eR1 RCM Inc. (NASDAQ: RCM)\u003c/strong\u003e, a leading provider of technology-driven solutions that transform the patient experience and financial performance of healthcare providers, in its acquisition of VisitPay, a leading digital payment solution provider.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCox Enterprises\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment into Faze Clan, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its acquisition of a fastener distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaDa Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of the controlling interest of New Day Aluminum Holdings LLC to Concord Resources Limited.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":115,"guid":"115.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":33,"guid":"33.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":32,"guid":"32.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1141,"guid":"1141.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Blaszak","nick_name":"Katie","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Kathleen","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":2484,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2009-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Next Generation Partner for M\u0026A Middle Market ($500M-999M)","detail":"Legal 500, 2022"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/katie-blaszak-79b3b333/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKatie Blaszak is a corporate attorney in our Mergers \u0026amp; Acquisitions and Private Equity practices.\u0026nbsp; Katie focuses her practice on advising clients on mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, complex commercial transactions, strategic partnerships, and other general corporate and business matters.\u0026nbsp; Katie has experience in a wide range of verticals, including manufacturing, distribution, telecommunications, mediate and technology sectors, having represented private equity firms and strategic clients in the paper, printing, power, industrials services, broadcast, cable, newspaper, digital media, technology, as well as automotive sectors.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCox Enterprises\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of a majority stake in Cox Media Group's television stations and its Dayton newspaper and radio stations to Apollo Global Management.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUSA Television\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of 11 television stations to Allen Media Broadcasting, a unit of Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios, for $305 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge mobility company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the creation of mobility subscription service joint venture.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ecable company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment in a fiber-optic network services provider.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge communications\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;company in its investment in and subsequent sale of such investment in a private tower and communications site company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its acquisition of a residential gas distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge media company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge media company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Florida.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebroadcast group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the acquisition of a television station in Huntsville, Alabama.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of its managed infrastructure as service solution portfolio company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eautomotive solutions provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its acquisition of aftermarket technology solutions company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge automotive solutions provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment and strategic alliance with an automotive inspections solutions company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUK based company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment in an ADSB air traffic surveillance service.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eR1 RCM Inc. (NASDAQ: RCM)\u003c/strong\u003e, a leading provider of technology-driven solutions that transform the patient experience and financial performance of healthcare providers, in its acquisition of VisitPay, a leading digital payment solution provider.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCox Enterprises\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its investment into Faze Clan, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its acquisition of a fastener distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaDa Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale of the controlling interest of New Day Aluminum Holdings LLC to Concord Resources Limited.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Next Generation Partner for M\u0026A Middle Market ($500M-999M)","detail":"Legal 500, 2022"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9764}]},"capability_group_id":1},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:58:48.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:58:48.000Z","searchable_text":"Blaszak{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Next Generation Partner for M\u0026amp;A Middle Market ($500M-999M)\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}Represented Cox Enterprises in the sale of a majority stake in Cox Media Group's television stations and its Dayton newspaper and radio stations to Apollo Global Management.{{ FIELD }}Represented USA Television in its sale of 11 television stations to Allen Media Broadcasting, a unit of Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios, for $305 million.{{ FIELD }}Represented large mobility company in the creation of mobility subscription service joint venture.{{ FIELD }}Represented a cable company in its investment in a fiber-optic network services provider.{{ FIELD }}Represented a large communications company in its investment in and subsequent sale of such investment in a private tower and communications site company.{{ FIELD }}Represented a private equity firm in connection with its acquisition of a residential gas distribution company.{{ FIELD }}Represented a large media company in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Texas.{{ FIELD }}Represented a large media company in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Florida.{{ FIELD }}Represented broadcast group in the acquisition of a television station in Huntsville, Alabama.{{ FIELD }}Represented private equity firm in its sale of its managed infrastructure as service solution portfolio company.{{ FIELD }}Represented automotive solutions provider in its acquisition of aftermarket technology solutions company.{{ FIELD }}Represented large automotive solutions provider in its investment and strategic alliance with an automotive inspections solutions company.{{ FIELD }}Represented UK based company in its investment in an ADSB air traffic surveillance service.{{ FIELD }}Represented R1 RCM Inc. (NASDAQ: RCM), a leading provider of technology-driven solutions that transform the patient experience and financial performance of healthcare providers, in its acquisition of VisitPay, a leading digital payment solution provider.{{ FIELD }}Represented Cox Enterprises in its investment into Faze Clan, Inc.{{ FIELD }}Represented a private equity company in its acquisition of a fastener distribution company.{{ FIELD }}Represented DaDa Holdings in its sale of the controlling interest of New Day Aluminum Holdings LLC to Concord Resources Limited.{{ FIELD }}Katie Blaszak is a corporate attorney in our Mergers \u0026amp; Acquisitions and Private Equity practices.  Katie focuses her practice on advising clients on mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, complex commercial transactions, strategic partnerships, and other general corporate and business matters.  Katie has experience in a wide range of verticals, including manufacturing, distribution, telecommunications, mediate and technology sectors, having represented private equity firms and strategic clients in the paper, printing, power, industrials services, broadcast, cable, newspaper, digital media, technology, as well as automotive sectors.  Partner Named a Next Generation Partner for M\u0026amp;A Middle Market ($500M-999M) Legal 500, 2022 Duke University Duke University School of Law Washington and Lee University Washington and Lee University School of Law District of Columbia Massachusetts Represented Cox Enterprises in the sale of a majority stake in Cox Media Group's television stations and its Dayton newspaper and radio stations to Apollo Global Management. Represented USA Television in its sale of 11 television stations to Allen Media Broadcasting, a unit of Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios, for $305 million. Represented large mobility company in the creation of mobility subscription service joint venture. Represented a cable company in its investment in a fiber-optic network services provider. Represented a large communications company in its investment in and subsequent sale of such investment in a private tower and communications site company. Represented a private equity firm in connection with its acquisition of a residential gas distribution company. Represented a large media company in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Texas. Represented a large media company in the sale of its newspapers and related media assets in Florida. Represented broadcast group in the acquisition of a television station in Huntsville, Alabama. Represented private equity firm in its sale of its managed infrastructure as service solution portfolio company. Represented automotive solutions provider in its acquisition of aftermarket technology solutions company. Represented large automotive solutions provider in its investment and strategic alliance with an automotive inspections solutions company. Represented UK based company in its investment in an ADSB air traffic surveillance service. Represented R1 RCM Inc. (NASDAQ: RCM), a leading provider of technology-driven solutions that transform the patient experience and financial performance of healthcare providers, in its acquisition of VisitPay, a leading digital payment solution provider. Represented Cox Enterprises in its investment into Faze Clan, Inc. Represented a private equity company in its acquisition of a fastener distribution company. Represented DaDa Holdings in its sale of the controlling interest of New Day Aluminum Holdings LLC to Concord Resources Limited.","searchable_name":"Kathleen Blaszak (Katie)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":447699,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3202,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eA partner in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Government Advocacy and Public Policy group, J.C. helps\u0026nbsp;companies\u0026nbsp;and trade associations navigate legal, political and regulatory issues commonly\u0026nbsp;associated with doing business in Europe and the United States.\u0026nbsp; He is recognized by clients for his strong, bipartisan relationships with Members of Congress, State Attorneys General, congressional staff and senior government officials across key regulatory and executive branch agencies.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;He is trusted for his ability to rapidly synthesize complex information and communicate its strategic implications to policymakers and senior institutional stakeholders as well as his candid evaluation of options and potential for success. \u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs former counsel to the Senate Banking Committee, J.C has developed a deep expertise in financial services, fintech, and emerging technology policy.\u0026nbsp; He has a proven track record of influencing federal legislation, regulatory frameworks, and agency rulemaking impacting digital assets, banking, payments, and technology platforms.\u0026nbsp; J.C. regularly interfaces with financial regulators on a wide array of policy and institution-specific issues, and as co-chair of the firm\u0026rsquo;s State Attorneys General practice, delivers results on high-impact legal work at the intersection of law, policy and regulation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ.C. is skilled in developing and executing comprehensive advocacy strategies, shaping legislative language, and positioning clients to successfully navigate complex and evolving policy environments at the federal, state and international levels.\u0026nbsp; As President of the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, he has briefed policymakers throughout Europe, Africa, Latin America, and the Indo-Pacific.\u0026nbsp; JC also advises international clients seeking to invest, expand, or operate in the United States.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePresident George W. Bush appointed J.C. to a six-year term as U.S. representative to the World Bank\u0026rsquo;s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).\u0026nbsp; Mayor Muriel Bowser also appointed J.C. to\u0026nbsp;the District of Columbia\u0026nbsp;Board of Elections, in which capacity he also served on the\u0026nbsp;U.S. Election Assistance Commission Standards Board.\u0026nbsp; He is currently chairman of the Board of Visitors of The Catholic University Columbus School of Law and President of\u0026nbsp;the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, where he is a regular speaker\u0026nbsp;on cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence and critical minerals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEarlier in his career, J.C. established the Boggs Scholarship for Public Service at the University of Delaware in honor of his grandfather and namesake, former U.S. Congressman, Senator and Governor of Delaware, J. Caleb Boggs.\u0026nbsp; He has also served on numerous corporate and non-profit boards, including Jobs for Delaware Graduates (Chairman); The Reserve Trust Company (Vice Chairman), Global Center for Social Entrepreneurship Network (Secretary), Republican National Lawyers Association (President), Kimball Union Academy (Chairman of the Committee on Trustees), and AAA Mid-Atlantic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ.C. enjoys open-water swimming and is member of U.S. Masters Swimming and the historic\u0026nbsp;Serpentine Swimming\u0026nbsp;Club situated in London's Hyde Park.\u0026nbsp; He has competed in swimming events across all 50 states, ten Canadian provinces and around the world.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"j-c-boggs","email":"jboggs@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":154},{"id":290}]},"expertise":[{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":699,"guid":"699.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":687,"guid":"687.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":110,"guid":"110.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1568,"guid":"1568.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":12,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Boggs","nick_name":"J.C.","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Court of Chancery, Delaware","years_held":"1987-88"}],"first_name":"J.C.","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":3010,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1987-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eA partner in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Government Advocacy and Public Policy group, J.C. helps\u0026nbsp;companies\u0026nbsp;and trade associations navigate legal, political and regulatory issues commonly\u0026nbsp;associated with doing business in Europe and the United States.\u0026nbsp; He is recognized by clients for his strong, bipartisan relationships with Members of Congress, State Attorneys General, congressional staff and senior government officials across key regulatory and executive branch agencies.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;He is trusted for his ability to rapidly synthesize complex information and communicate its strategic implications to policymakers and senior institutional stakeholders as well as his candid evaluation of options and potential for success. \u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs former counsel to the Senate Banking Committee, J.C has developed a deep expertise in financial services, fintech, and emerging technology policy.\u0026nbsp; He has a proven track record of influencing federal legislation, regulatory frameworks, and agency rulemaking impacting digital assets, banking, payments, and technology platforms.\u0026nbsp; J.C. regularly interfaces with financial regulators on a wide array of policy and institution-specific issues, and as co-chair of the firm\u0026rsquo;s State Attorneys General practice, delivers results on high-impact legal work at the intersection of law, policy and regulation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ.C. is skilled in developing and executing comprehensive advocacy strategies, shaping legislative language, and positioning clients to successfully navigate complex and evolving policy environments at the federal, state and international levels.\u0026nbsp; As President of the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, he has briefed policymakers throughout Europe, Africa, Latin America, and the Indo-Pacific.\u0026nbsp; JC also advises international clients seeking to invest, expand, or operate in the United States.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePresident George W. Bush appointed J.C. to a six-year term as U.S. representative to the World Bank\u0026rsquo;s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).\u0026nbsp; Mayor Muriel Bowser also appointed J.C. to\u0026nbsp;the District of Columbia\u0026nbsp;Board of Elections, in which capacity he also served on the\u0026nbsp;U.S. Election Assistance Commission Standards Board.\u0026nbsp; He is currently chairman of the Board of Visitors of The Catholic University Columbus School of Law and President of\u0026nbsp;the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, where he is a regular speaker\u0026nbsp;on cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence and critical minerals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEarlier in his career, J.C. established the Boggs Scholarship for Public Service at the University of Delaware in honor of his grandfather and namesake, former U.S. Congressman, Senator and Governor of Delaware, J. Caleb Boggs.\u0026nbsp; He has also served on numerous corporate and non-profit boards, including Jobs for Delaware Graduates (Chairman); The Reserve Trust Company (Vice Chairman), Global Center for Social Entrepreneurship Network (Secretary), Republican National Lawyers Association (President), Kimball Union Academy (Chairman of the Committee on Trustees), and AAA Mid-Atlantic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ.C. enjoys open-water swimming and is member of U.S. Masters Swimming and the historic\u0026nbsp;Serpentine Swimming\u0026nbsp;Club situated in London's Hyde Park.\u0026nbsp; He has competed in swimming events across all 50 states, ten Canadian provinces and around the world.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9959}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2026-04-21T21:14:35.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-21T21:14:35.000Z","searchable_text":"Boggs{{ FIELD }}A partner in the firm’s Government Advocacy and Public Policy group, J.C. helps companies and trade associations navigate legal, political and regulatory issues commonly associated with doing business in Europe and the United States.  He is recognized by clients for his strong, bipartisan relationships with Members of Congress, State Attorneys General, congressional staff and senior government officials across key regulatory and executive branch agencies.   He is trusted for his ability to rapidly synthesize complex information and communicate its strategic implications to policymakers and senior institutional stakeholders as well as his candid evaluation of options and potential for success.  \nAs former counsel to the Senate Banking Committee, J.C has developed a deep expertise in financial services, fintech, and emerging technology policy.  He has a proven track record of influencing federal legislation, regulatory frameworks, and agency rulemaking impacting digital assets, banking, payments, and technology platforms.  J.C. regularly interfaces with financial regulators on a wide array of policy and institution-specific issues, and as co-chair of the firm’s State Attorneys General practice, delivers results on high-impact legal work at the intersection of law, policy and regulation.\nJ.C. is skilled in developing and executing comprehensive advocacy strategies, shaping legislative language, and positioning clients to successfully navigate complex and evolving policy environments at the federal, state and international levels.  As President of the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, he has briefed policymakers throughout Europe, Africa, Latin America, and the Indo-Pacific.  JC also advises international clients seeking to invest, expand, or operate in the United States.\nPresident George W. Bush appointed J.C. to a six-year term as U.S. representative to the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).  Mayor Muriel Bowser also appointed J.C. to the District of Columbia Board of Elections, in which capacity he also served on the U.S. Election Assistance Commission Standards Board.  He is currently chairman of the Board of Visitors of The Catholic University Columbus School of Law and President of the Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum, where he is a regular speaker on cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence and critical minerals.\nEarlier in his career, J.C. established the Boggs Scholarship for Public Service at the University of Delaware in honor of his grandfather and namesake, former U.S. Congressman, Senator and Governor of Delaware, J. Caleb Boggs.  He has also served on numerous corporate and non-profit boards, including Jobs for Delaware Graduates (Chairman); The Reserve Trust Company (Vice Chairman), Global Center for Social Entrepreneurship Network (Secretary), Republican National Lawyers Association (President), Kimball Union Academy (Chairman of the Committee on Trustees), and AAA Mid-Atlantic.\nJ.C. enjoys open-water swimming and is member of U.S. Masters Swimming and the historic Serpentine Swimming Club situated in London's Hyde Park.  He has competed in swimming events across all 50 states, ten Canadian provinces and around the world. J.C. Boggs fintech Partner University of Richmond University of Richmond School of Law Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America Georgetown University Georgetown University Law Center Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Federal Claims U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware District of Columbia Delaware Law Clerk, Court of Chancery, Delaware","searchable_name":"J.C. Boggs","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":427703,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1673,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrian Bohnenkamp specializes in regulatory and compliance matters relating to drug, biotechnology and medical device companies. A partner in our FDA practice and a member of our Life Sciences group, Brian has extensive experience counseling manufacturers on fraud and abuse laws, industry codes of conduct, federal and state transparency laws and regulations, state and local gift bans, compliance program laws and sales representative licensing requirements, as well as government ethics restrictions.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith a master\u0026rsquo;s degree in healthcare administration, Brian provides counsel to companies on a variety of laws and regulations administered and enforced by FDA, OIG, DOJ, and CMS, as well as by state attorneys general, boards of pharmacy, departments of health, and similar administrative and enforcement authorities. He regularly assists manufacturers in designing and implementing comprehensive compliance programs, and conducts risk assessments, audits and other reviews of compliance programs and business activities/operations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrian is regarded as a national expert on life sciences transparency laws and regulations, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (aka Open Payments) and similar state laws. He provides counsel to the Ad Hoc Sunshine and State Law Compliance Group, a coalition of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device manufacturers.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"brian-bohnenkamp","email":"bbohnenkamp@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":25}]},"expertise":[{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1199,"guid":"1199.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1193,"guid":"1193.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Bohnenkamp","nick_name":"Brian","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Brian","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Up and Coming, Healthcare: Pharmaceutical /Medical Products Regulatory ","detail":"Chambers USA, District of Columbia (2020-2022)"},{"title":"\"Brian's knowledge and experience are invaluable.\" ","detail":"Chambers USA (2022) "},{"title":"Next Generation Partner","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Up and Coming for Pharmaceutical/Medical Products Regulatory","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Rising Star ","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2017-2020"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrian Bohnenkamp specializes in regulatory and compliance matters relating to drug, biotechnology and medical device companies. A partner in our FDA practice and a member of our Life Sciences group, Brian has extensive experience counseling manufacturers on fraud and abuse laws, industry codes of conduct, federal and state transparency laws and regulations, state and local gift bans, compliance program laws and sales representative licensing requirements, as well as government ethics restrictions.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith a master\u0026rsquo;s degree in healthcare administration, Brian provides counsel to companies on a variety of laws and regulations administered and enforced by FDA, OIG, DOJ, and CMS, as well as by state attorneys general, boards of pharmacy, departments of health, and similar administrative and enforcement authorities. He regularly assists manufacturers in designing and implementing comprehensive compliance programs, and conducts risk assessments, audits and other reviews of compliance programs and business activities/operations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrian is regarded as a national expert on life sciences transparency laws and regulations, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (aka Open Payments) and similar state laws. He provides counsel to the Ad Hoc Sunshine and State Law Compliance Group, a coalition of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device manufacturers.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Up and Coming, Healthcare: Pharmaceutical /Medical Products Regulatory ","detail":"Chambers USA, District of Columbia (2020-2022)"},{"title":"\"Brian's knowledge and experience are invaluable.\" ","detail":"Chambers USA (2022) "},{"title":"Next Generation Partner","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Up and Coming for Pharmaceutical/Medical Products Regulatory","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Rising Star ","detail":"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2017-2020"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":735}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2025-05-26T05:03:56.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T05:03:56.000Z","searchable_text":"Bohnenkamp{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Up and Coming, Healthcare: Pharmaceutical /Medical Products Regulatory \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, District of Columbia (2020-2022)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Brian's knowledge and experience are invaluable.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA (2022) \"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Next Generation Partner\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Up and Coming for Pharmaceutical/Medical Products Regulatory\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising Star \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2017-2020\"}{{ FIELD }}Brian Bohnenkamp specializes in regulatory and compliance matters relating to drug, biotechnology and medical device companies. A partner in our FDA practice and a member of our Life Sciences group, Brian has extensive experience counseling manufacturers on fraud and abuse laws, industry codes of conduct, federal and state transparency laws and regulations, state and local gift bans, compliance program laws and sales representative licensing requirements, as well as government ethics restrictions.\nWith a master’s degree in healthcare administration, Brian provides counsel to companies on a variety of laws and regulations administered and enforced by FDA, OIG, DOJ, and CMS, as well as by state attorneys general, boards of pharmacy, departments of health, and similar administrative and enforcement authorities. He regularly assists manufacturers in designing and implementing comprehensive compliance programs, and conducts risk assessments, audits and other reviews of compliance programs and business activities/operations.\nBrian is regarded as a national expert on life sciences transparency laws and regulations, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (aka Open Payments) and similar state laws. He provides counsel to the Ad Hoc Sunshine and State Law Compliance Group, a coalition of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device manufacturers. Brian A Bohnenkamp Partner Up and Coming, Healthcare: Pharmaceutical /Medical Products Regulatory  Chambers USA, District of Columbia (2020-2022) \"Brian's knowledge and experience are invaluable.\"  Chambers USA (2022)  Next Generation Partner Legal 500 Up and Coming for Pharmaceutical/Medical Products Regulatory Chambers Rising Star  Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers, 2017-2020 Indiana University Indiana University School of Law St. Louis University  St. Louis University  District of Columbia Illinois","searchable_name":"Brian A. Bohnenkamp","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":438577,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3229,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJim Bowe focuses on the energy sector, including regulation of the pipeline, oil and gas, hydrogen/renewable fuels and electric power industries, and commercial matters relating to energy production, transportation, storage and use. Jim advises clients on energy and infrastructure project development and financing, energy and environmental regulatory compliance questions, clean energy incentive regimes and energy transactions. \u0026nbsp;He has handled energy matters in North America, South America and the Middle East.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJim represents both conventional and renewable energy project developers, owners, operators, investors and lenders, as well as energy shippers and end users. He advises clients in securing authorizations to build and expand energy production, transportation and storage facilities, and in rate and enforcement proceedings before federal, state and territorial regulators. Jim has also represented financial institutions and project developers in connection with the development and financing of U.S. and international energy projects, and in merger and acquisition matters involving energy assets and companies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJim counsels clients on energy supply, transportation, storage, asset management and tolling agreement negotiations; permitting issues; energy company reorganizations; and transactions and financings involving natural gas, liquefied natural gas, petroleum, hydrogen and renewable fuels, conventional and renewable electric power generation, electric transmission, and district energy. Jim also assists energy sector clients in addressing environmental permitting and compliance issues (including climate change and Environmental Justice issues) and pipeline safety issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExperienced in a wide range of energy sector law, Jim is a frequent speaker, panelist and author. Jim heads King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Hydrogen Initiative, which serves as a clearinghouse for information relating to the evolution of hydrogen as a clean fuel, energy storage medium and renewable energy enabler and the firm\u0026rsquo;s work in this growing area.\u0026nbsp; Jim has been recognized for two decades as a leading practitioner in the oil \u0026amp; gas sector by publications such as Chambers Global, Chambers USA, Legal 500 and Best Lawyers.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"james-bowe","email":"jbowe@kslaw.com","phone":"+1-202-744-7768","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enatural gas pipeline companies, natural gas storage companies, midstream companies, LNG terminal developers, and pipeline shippers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a variety of rate, tariff, capacity allocation and export authorization proceedings before the U.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of the Interior and other U.S. regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edevelopers of conventional and renewable electric generation facilities, hydrogen hub and production facilities, renewable fuels production projects, district energy facilities and energy storage providers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon permitting matters, concession arrangements, fuel supply and offtake contract negotiations, regulatory approvals and financing matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esponsors and offtakers in the development, permitting, expansion and financing of gas-fired, biomass fueled and wind electric generating facilities and hydrogen hubs in the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Brazil,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;including some of the largest wind generation projects developed to date in Texas; more than a dozen underground natural gas storage projects in the U.S.; numerous natural gas, petroleum and petrochemicals pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; several natural gas and oil production facility, gathering system, processing plant and pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; liquefied natural gas production, storage, import and export facilities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico; hydrogen production, storage and distribution facilities in the U.S. and Canada; and several expansions or conversions of energy pipeline facilities to ethane and other NGLs service.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epotential investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with the evaluation of pipeline, storage facility, electric generating facility, electric transmission facility, hydrogen and clean fuels production and storage projects for potential acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003easset owners, infrastructure funds, and master limited partnerships\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in sales and purchases of ownership interests in natural gas storage facilities, natural gas pipelines, oil and gas midstream companies, gas distribution companies, electric utilities, and conventional and renewable electric power generation facilities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enatural gas, oil, NGLs, hydrogen and CO2 pipeline and storage facility owners, prospective owners and operators\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on compliance with pipeline safety regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egovernment agency and other stakeholders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the structuring of regulatory regimes to govern the development, operation and service offerings of district cooling facilities and the restructuring of the water/wastewater sectors in two jurisdictions in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eparticipants in Brazil\u0026rsquo;s independent power and natural gas sectors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on commercial, project development and regulatory policy matters.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":35,"guid":"35.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":33,"guid":"33.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":78,"guid":"78.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":32,"guid":"32.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":22,"guid":"22.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":984,"guid":"984.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1114,"guid":"1114.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1149,"guid":"1149.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":125,"guid":"125.capabilities","index":12,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1219,"guid":"1219.smart_tags","index":13,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1236,"guid":"1236.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":15,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":131,"guid":"131.capabilities","index":16,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":17,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1488,"guid":"1488.smart_tags","index":18,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":19,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Bowe","nick_name":"Jim","clerkships":[],"first_name":"James","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":1451,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1982-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"F.","name_suffix":"Jr.","recognitions":[{"title":"One of the U.S. Energy Bar’s leading lawyers","detail":"Chambers USA and Chambers Global, 2003–2025"},{"title":"Ranked in Nationwide, Energy: Oil \u0026 Gas (Regulatory \u0026 Litigation)","detail":"Chambers USA, 2017-2025"},{"title":"A Leading Lawyer in Energy: Regulatory","detail":"Legal 500 United States, 2016-2023"},{"title":"One of Washington, D.C.’s Super Lawyers in Energy \u0026 Natural Resources","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2014–2025"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-bowe-26a6515/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJim Bowe focuses on the energy sector, including regulation of the pipeline, oil and gas, hydrogen/renewable fuels and electric power industries, and commercial matters relating to energy production, transportation, storage and use. Jim advises clients on energy and infrastructure project development and financing, energy and environmental regulatory compliance questions, clean energy incentive regimes and energy transactions. \u0026nbsp;He has handled energy matters in North America, South America and the Middle East.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJim represents both conventional and renewable energy project developers, owners, operators, investors and lenders, as well as energy shippers and end users. He advises clients in securing authorizations to build and expand energy production, transportation and storage facilities, and in rate and enforcement proceedings before federal, state and territorial regulators. Jim has also represented financial institutions and project developers in connection with the development and financing of U.S. and international energy projects, and in merger and acquisition matters involving energy assets and companies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJim counsels clients on energy supply, transportation, storage, asset management and tolling agreement negotiations; permitting issues; energy company reorganizations; and transactions and financings involving natural gas, liquefied natural gas, petroleum, hydrogen and renewable fuels, conventional and renewable electric power generation, electric transmission, and district energy. Jim also assists energy sector clients in addressing environmental permitting and compliance issues (including climate change and Environmental Justice issues) and pipeline safety issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExperienced in a wide range of energy sector law, Jim is a frequent speaker, panelist and author. Jim heads King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Hydrogen Initiative, which serves as a clearinghouse for information relating to the evolution of hydrogen as a clean fuel, energy storage medium and renewable energy enabler and the firm\u0026rsquo;s work in this growing area.\u0026nbsp; Jim has been recognized for two decades as a leading practitioner in the oil \u0026amp; gas sector by publications such as Chambers Global, Chambers USA, Legal 500 and Best Lawyers.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enatural gas pipeline companies, natural gas storage companies, midstream companies, LNG terminal developers, and pipeline shippers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a variety of rate, tariff, capacity allocation and export authorization proceedings before the U.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of the Interior and other U.S. regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edevelopers of conventional and renewable electric generation facilities, hydrogen hub and production facilities, renewable fuels production projects, district energy facilities and energy storage providers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon permitting matters, concession arrangements, fuel supply and offtake contract negotiations, regulatory approvals and financing matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esponsors and offtakers in the development, permitting, expansion and financing of gas-fired, biomass fueled and wind electric generating facilities and hydrogen hubs in the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Brazil,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;including some of the largest wind generation projects developed to date in Texas; more than a dozen underground natural gas storage projects in the U.S.; numerous natural gas, petroleum and petrochemicals pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; several natural gas and oil production facility, gathering system, processing plant and pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; liquefied natural gas production, storage, import and export facilities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico; hydrogen production, storage and distribution facilities in the U.S. and Canada; and several expansions or conversions of energy pipeline facilities to ethane and other NGLs service.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epotential investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with the evaluation of pipeline, storage facility, electric generating facility, electric transmission facility, hydrogen and clean fuels production and storage projects for potential acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003easset owners, infrastructure funds, and master limited partnerships\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in sales and purchases of ownership interests in natural gas storage facilities, natural gas pipelines, oil and gas midstream companies, gas distribution companies, electric utilities, and conventional and renewable electric power generation facilities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvises\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enatural gas, oil, NGLs, hydrogen and CO2 pipeline and storage facility owners, prospective owners and operators\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on compliance with pipeline safety regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egovernment agency and other stakeholders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the structuring of regulatory regimes to govern the development, operation and service offerings of district cooling facilities and the restructuring of the water/wastewater sectors in two jurisdictions in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eparticipants in Brazil\u0026rsquo;s independent power and natural gas sectors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on commercial, project development and regulatory policy matters.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"One of the U.S. Energy Bar’s leading lawyers","detail":"Chambers USA and Chambers Global, 2003–2025"},{"title":"Ranked in Nationwide, Energy: Oil \u0026 Gas (Regulatory \u0026 Litigation)","detail":"Chambers USA, 2017-2025"},{"title":"A Leading Lawyer in Energy: Regulatory","detail":"Legal 500 United States, 2016-2023"},{"title":"One of Washington, D.C.’s Super Lawyers in Energy \u0026 Natural Resources","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2014–2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":739}]},"capability_group_id":1},"created_at":"2025-09-30T16:09:09.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-30T16:09:09.000Z","searchable_text":"Bowe{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"One of the U.S. Energy Bar’s leading lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA and Chambers Global, 2003–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked in Nationwide, Energy: Oil \u0026amp; Gas (Regulatory \u0026amp; Litigation)\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2017-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"A Leading Lawyer in Energy: Regulatory\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 United States, 2016-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"One of Washington, D.C.’s Super Lawyers in Energy \u0026amp; Natural Resources\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2014–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Represents natural gas pipeline companies, natural gas storage companies, midstream companies, LNG terminal developers, and pipeline shippers in a variety of rate, tariff, capacity allocation and export authorization proceedings before the U.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of the Interior and other U.S. regulators.{{ FIELD }}Advises developers of conventional and renewable electric generation facilities, hydrogen hub and production facilities, renewable fuels production projects, district energy facilities and energy storage providers on permitting matters, concession arrangements, fuel supply and offtake contract negotiations, regulatory approvals and financing matters.{{ FIELD }}Represents sponsors and offtakers in the development, permitting, expansion and financing of gas-fired, biomass fueled and wind electric generating facilities and hydrogen hubs in the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Brazil, including some of the largest wind generation projects developed to date in Texas; more than a dozen underground natural gas storage projects in the U.S.; numerous natural gas, petroleum and petrochemicals pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; several natural gas and oil production facility, gathering system, processing plant and pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; liquefied natural gas production, storage, import and export facilities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico; hydrogen production, storage and distribution facilities in the U.S. and Canada; and several expansions or conversions of energy pipeline facilities to ethane and other NGLs service.{{ FIELD }}Advises potential investors in connection with the evaluation of pipeline, storage facility, electric generating facility, electric transmission facility, hydrogen and clean fuels production and storage projects for potential acquisition.{{ FIELD }}Advises asset owners, infrastructure funds, and master limited partnerships in sales and purchases of ownership interests in natural gas storage facilities, natural gas pipelines, oil and gas midstream companies, gas distribution companies, electric utilities, and conventional and renewable electric power generation facilities.{{ FIELD }}Advises natural gas, oil, NGLs, hydrogen and CO2 pipeline and storage facility owners, prospective owners and operators on compliance with pipeline safety regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.{{ FIELD }}Advised a government agency and other stakeholders on the structuring of regulatory regimes to govern the development, operation and service offerings of district cooling facilities and the restructuring of the water/wastewater sectors in two jurisdictions in the Middle East.{{ FIELD }}Advised participants in Brazil’s independent power and natural gas sectors on commercial, project development and regulatory policy matters.{{ FIELD }}Jim Bowe focuses on the energy sector, including regulation of the pipeline, oil and gas, hydrogen/renewable fuels and electric power industries, and commercial matters relating to energy production, transportation, storage and use. Jim advises clients on energy and infrastructure project development and financing, energy and environmental regulatory compliance questions, clean energy incentive regimes and energy transactions.  He has handled energy matters in North America, South America and the Middle East.\nJim represents both conventional and renewable energy project developers, owners, operators, investors and lenders, as well as energy shippers and end users. He advises clients in securing authorizations to build and expand energy production, transportation and storage facilities, and in rate and enforcement proceedings before federal, state and territorial regulators. Jim has also represented financial institutions and project developers in connection with the development and financing of U.S. and international energy projects, and in merger and acquisition matters involving energy assets and companies.\nJim counsels clients on energy supply, transportation, storage, asset management and tolling agreement negotiations; permitting issues; energy company reorganizations; and transactions and financings involving natural gas, liquefied natural gas, petroleum, hydrogen and renewable fuels, conventional and renewable electric power generation, electric transmission, and district energy. Jim also assists energy sector clients in addressing environmental permitting and compliance issues (including climate change and Environmental Justice issues) and pipeline safety issues.\nExperienced in a wide range of energy sector law, Jim is a frequent speaker, panelist and author. Jim heads King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Hydrogen Initiative, which serves as a clearinghouse for information relating to the evolution of hydrogen as a clean fuel, energy storage medium and renewable energy enabler and the firm’s work in this growing area.  Jim has been recognized for two decades as a leading practitioner in the oil \u0026amp; gas sector by publications such as Chambers Global, Chambers USA, Legal 500 and Best Lawyers. Partner One of the U.S. Energy Bar’s leading lawyers Chambers USA and Chambers Global, 2003–2025 Ranked in Nationwide, Energy: Oil \u0026amp; Gas (Regulatory \u0026amp; Litigation) Chambers USA, 2017-2025 A Leading Lawyer in Energy: Regulatory Legal 500 United States, 2016-2023 One of Washington, D.C.’s Super Lawyers in Energy \u0026amp; Natural Resources Super Lawyers, 2014–2025 Williams College  Northwestern University Northwestern Pritzker School of Law District of Columbia American Bar Association Energy Bar Association Represents natural gas pipeline companies, natural gas storage companies, midstream companies, LNG terminal developers, and pipeline shippers in a variety of rate, tariff, capacity allocation and export authorization proceedings before the U.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of the Interior and other U.S. regulators. Advises developers of conventional and renewable electric generation facilities, hydrogen hub and production facilities, renewable fuels production projects, district energy facilities and energy storage providers on permitting matters, concession arrangements, fuel supply and offtake contract negotiations, regulatory approvals and financing matters. Represents sponsors and offtakers in the development, permitting, expansion and financing of gas-fired, biomass fueled and wind electric generating facilities and hydrogen hubs in the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Brazil, including some of the largest wind generation projects developed to date in Texas; more than a dozen underground natural gas storage projects in the U.S.; numerous natural gas, petroleum and petrochemicals pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; several natural gas and oil production facility, gathering system, processing plant and pipeline construction and expansion projects in the U.S. and Canada; liquefied natural gas production, storage, import and export facilities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico; hydrogen production, storage and distribution facilities in the U.S. and Canada; and several expansions or conversions of energy pipeline facilities to ethane and other NGLs service. Advises potential investors in connection with the evaluation of pipeline, storage facility, electric generating facility, electric transmission facility, hydrogen and clean fuels production and storage projects for potential acquisition. Advises asset owners, infrastructure funds, and master limited partnerships in sales and purchases of ownership interests in natural gas storage facilities, natural gas pipelines, oil and gas midstream companies, gas distribution companies, electric utilities, and conventional and renewable electric power generation facilities. Advises natural gas, oil, NGLs, hydrogen and CO2 pipeline and storage facility owners, prospective owners and operators on compliance with pipeline safety regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Advised a government agency and other stakeholders on the structuring of regulatory regimes to govern the development, operation and service offerings of district cooling facilities and the restructuring of the water/wastewater sectors in two jurisdictions in the Middle East. Advised participants in Brazil’s independent power and natural gas sectors on commercial, project development and regulatory policy matters.","searchable_name":"James F. Bowe, Jr. (Jim)","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":442372,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":883,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMark Brown is nationally recognized in Food \u0026amp; Drug Administration regulatory matters, civil litigation, criminal investigations and prosecutions, compliance matters and comprehensive risk assessments. Mark advises pharmaceutical, medical device and biotech companies, and pharmacies, on a broad range of FDA requirements and FDA regulatory issues that arise in products liability litigation and other disputes. A former Associate Chief Counsel for FDA, Mark is the Chair of the FDA and Life Sciences practice.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark has developed a national reputation for successfully resolving difficult and complex FDA compliance matters and enforcement actions. For pharmaceutical, medical device and food companies, and pharmacies, he has successfully negotiated and managed numerous complex consent decrees of injunction, successfully defended an injunction action brought by FDA, and persuaded the government not to bring enforcement actions in other civil and criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark regularly counsels clients on drug safety issues, clinical trials, adverse event reporting, quality systems and manufacturing practices for drugs and devices. He also provides guidance concerning product failure investigations, factory inspections, recalls, product labeling, drug compounding, advertising, promotion, sales and marketing practices, and regularly advises clients on strategies for obtaining FDA approval and clearance for medical products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark also handles FDA-related issues in product liability and commercial litigation. He was an architect of the preemption defense for both pharmaceutical and medical device clients, developing supporting evidence, briefing and arguing federal preemption motions in various federal and state courts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining the FDA, Mark was an attorney in the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission, where he concentrated on consumer fraud, healthcare advertising and promotional activities. He developed FTC enforcement actions against weight-loss centers, in vitro fertilization clinics and Northern Virginia infertility doctor Cecil B. Jacobson, who was later convicted of defrauding patients.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"mark-brown","email":"mbrown@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePhillip Morris USA\u003c/strong\u003e v. FDA\u003c/em\u003e, 202 F.Supp. 3d (D.D.C. 2016). Represented one of the plaintiffs in a successful legal challenge to an FDA guidance governing the Substantial Equivalence Review process for tobacco products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eUnited States v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eFranck's Lab\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e 2011 WL 4031102 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 12, 2011). Lead counsel in successful defense of FDA enforcement action against pharmacy compounder of veterinary drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring his 30-year career, he has served as lead counsel and negotiator for numerous consent decrees of injunction, both during his tenure with FDA (1990\u0026ndash;1994), and since 1994 in private practice. For example, he has negotiated consent decrees some of the world's largest device manufacturers, including \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMedtronic\u003c/strong\u003e (2008 and 2015), \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eThe General Electric Company\u003c/strong\u003e (2007) and \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eBaxter Healthcare\u003c/strong\u003e (2006).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSince 2002, served on the national counsel team for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e in the Paxil Products Liability Litigation. Represented GSK on all FDA-related issues, including federal preemption. Argued and won a summary judgment motion on federal preemption grounds in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eO'Neal v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmithKline Beecham\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Cal 2008). In 2002, represented GSK in successfully defending an injunction seeking to enjoin GSK from making claims in direct-to-consumer television advertising for Paxil.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFrom 1995 to 2001, served on \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e3M\u003c/strong\u003e's National Trial Team in the Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implant Litigation. Responsible for virtually all FDA issues and had primary responsibility for preparation and handling of defense expert witnesses, and cross-examination of adverse witnesses on FDA issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eConnaught Laboratories v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmithKline Beecham\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e 7 F.Supp. 2d 477 (D.Del. 1998), appeal dismissed, 165 F.3d 1368 (1999). Represented SmithKline Beecham in winning one of the few successful motions to compel FDA to provide testimony by its research scientists in patent litigation relating to purified form of pertactin, a component of the pertussis vaccine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNext Nutrition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ev. SportPharma USA, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 97-CV-1898J (1997). Served as lead counsel to a dietary supplement company that brought an action under the Lanham Act alleging false and misleading comparative advertising relating to competing products. Successfully negotiated a favorable settlement by obtaining a consent decree of permanent injunction and a damage award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003epharmaceutical manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e in grand jury investigations regarding data integrity concerns in regulatory submissions to FDA, and alleged cGMP violations. In both cases, the U.S. Department of Justice declined to prosecute the company and individuals under investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted internal investigations into the sales and marketing practices of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emultiple international pharmaceutical and biotech companies\u003c/strong\u003e to develop a risk profile and recommendations for reducing potential liability and risk exposure.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted comprehensive prelaunch risk assessments for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Top 10 pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e blockbuster drug to identify potential medical, scientific, regulatory and products liability risk areas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted a risk assessment for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea top tier biotechnology company\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e drug safety system to identify areas for possible improvement in pharmacovigilence planning, postmarket signal detection and investigation, and business decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLed numerous internal investigations for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ebiotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e into allegations made by current and former employees regarding product integrity issues, sales and marketing activities, and manufacturing quality issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eseveral drug and device manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e concerning product approvals, and in responding to FDA requests for information relating to promotion and advertising, manufacturing practices, field alerts, recalls and numerous post-market issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s foremost cardiovascular institutes and some of the leading interventional cardiologists in responding to deficiencies identified during FDA inspections and developing appropriate corrective action to avoid further FDA regulatory enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a device manufacturer in obtaining expedited PMA review and approval in 90 days for a first-of-a-kind device to treat aneurysms in the renal vascular arteries. Successfully obtained approval for a major PMA supplement for the same product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a device manufacturer and coordinated an extensive product investigation into reported failures of an implantable device featuring sophisticated failure analyses and clinical assessments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted extensive training on FDA regulatory, IRB and protocol requirements for clinical investigators participating in the study of implantable devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAssisted numerous companies in preparing for FDA inspections, developing responses to FDA observations (FDA-483 forms) and warning letters related to manufacturing practices, quality systems, adverse event reporting, deviations from approved drug master files and manufacturing processes, and a variety of other regulatory matters. Assisted these companies in preparing for meetings with FDA compliance officials in District Offices, centers for drugs and devices, and the Office of Chief Counsel.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":51}]},"expertise":[{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1303,"guid":"1303.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":12,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Brown","nick_name":"Mark","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Mark","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":196,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"S.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized by Super Lawyers as Top Rated FDA Attorney ","detail":"Law \u0026 Politics, 2007, 2010–2011, 2013–2017"},{"title":"Ranked Among the Best Life Sciences Lawyers in the U.S. ","detail":"Legal 500, 2016"},{"title":"Named Life Sciences Star ","detail":"LMG Life Sciences, 2012–2016"},{"title":"Recognized as one of Washington’s Best Lawyers ","detail":"Washingtonian magazine, 2004–2016"},{"title":"Superior Achievement Award ","detail":"U.S. Department of Health \u0026 Human Services, 1992"},{"title":"Commendable Service Award ","detail":"FDA, 1992–1994"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMark Brown is nationally recognized in Food \u0026amp; Drug Administration regulatory matters, civil litigation, criminal investigations and prosecutions, compliance matters and comprehensive risk assessments. Mark advises pharmaceutical, medical device and biotech companies, and pharmacies, on a broad range of FDA requirements and FDA regulatory issues that arise in products liability litigation and other disputes. A former Associate Chief Counsel for FDA, Mark is the Chair of the FDA and Life Sciences practice.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark has developed a national reputation for successfully resolving difficult and complex FDA compliance matters and enforcement actions. For pharmaceutical, medical device and food companies, and pharmacies, he has successfully negotiated and managed numerous complex consent decrees of injunction, successfully defended an injunction action brought by FDA, and persuaded the government not to bring enforcement actions in other civil and criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark regularly counsels clients on drug safety issues, clinical trials, adverse event reporting, quality systems and manufacturing practices for drugs and devices. He also provides guidance concerning product failure investigations, factory inspections, recalls, product labeling, drug compounding, advertising, promotion, sales and marketing practices, and regularly advises clients on strategies for obtaining FDA approval and clearance for medical products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark also handles FDA-related issues in product liability and commercial litigation. He was an architect of the preemption defense for both pharmaceutical and medical device clients, developing supporting evidence, briefing and arguing federal preemption motions in various federal and state courts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining the FDA, Mark was an attorney in the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission, where he concentrated on consumer fraud, healthcare advertising and promotional activities. He developed FTC enforcement actions against weight-loss centers, in vitro fertilization clinics and Northern Virginia infertility doctor Cecil B. Jacobson, who was later convicted of defrauding patients.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePhillip Morris USA\u003c/strong\u003e v. FDA\u003c/em\u003e, 202 F.Supp. 3d (D.D.C. 2016). Represented one of the plaintiffs in a successful legal challenge to an FDA guidance governing the Substantial Equivalence Review process for tobacco products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eUnited States v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eFranck's Lab\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e 2011 WL 4031102 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 12, 2011). Lead counsel in successful defense of FDA enforcement action against pharmacy compounder of veterinary drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring his 30-year career, he has served as lead counsel and negotiator for numerous consent decrees of injunction, both during his tenure with FDA (1990\u0026ndash;1994), and since 1994 in private practice. For example, he has negotiated consent decrees some of the world's largest device manufacturers, including \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMedtronic\u003c/strong\u003e (2008 and 2015), \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eThe General Electric Company\u003c/strong\u003e (2007) and \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eBaxter Healthcare\u003c/strong\u003e (2006).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSince 2002, served on the national counsel team for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e in the Paxil Products Liability Litigation. Represented GSK on all FDA-related issues, including federal preemption. Argued and won a summary judgment motion on federal preemption grounds in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eO'Neal v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmithKline Beecham\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Cal 2008). In 2002, represented GSK in successfully defending an injunction seeking to enjoin GSK from making claims in direct-to-consumer television advertising for Paxil.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFrom 1995 to 2001, served on \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e3M\u003c/strong\u003e's National Trial Team in the Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implant Litigation. Responsible for virtually all FDA issues and had primary responsibility for preparation and handling of defense expert witnesses, and cross-examination of adverse witnesses on FDA issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eConnaught Laboratories v. \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmithKline Beecham\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e 7 F.Supp. 2d 477 (D.Del. 1998), appeal dismissed, 165 F.3d 1368 (1999). Represented SmithKline Beecham in winning one of the few successful motions to compel FDA to provide testimony by its research scientists in patent litigation relating to purified form of pertactin, a component of the pertussis vaccine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNext Nutrition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003ev. SportPharma USA, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 97-CV-1898J (1997). Served as lead counsel to a dietary supplement company that brought an action under the Lanham Act alleging false and misleading comparative advertising relating to competing products. Successfully negotiated a favorable settlement by obtaining a consent decree of permanent injunction and a damage award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003epharmaceutical manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e in grand jury investigations regarding data integrity concerns in regulatory submissions to FDA, and alleged cGMP violations. In both cases, the U.S. Department of Justice declined to prosecute the company and individuals under investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted internal investigations into the sales and marketing practices of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emultiple international pharmaceutical and biotech companies\u003c/strong\u003e to develop a risk profile and recommendations for reducing potential liability and risk exposure.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted comprehensive prelaunch risk assessments for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Top 10 pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e blockbuster drug to identify potential medical, scientific, regulatory and products liability risk areas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted a risk assessment for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea top tier biotechnology company\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e drug safety system to identify areas for possible improvement in pharmacovigilence planning, postmarket signal detection and investigation, and business decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLed numerous internal investigations for \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ebiotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e into allegations made by current and former employees regarding product integrity issues, sales and marketing activities, and manufacturing quality issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eseveral drug and device manufacturers\u003c/strong\u003e concerning product approvals, and in responding to FDA requests for information relating to promotion and advertising, manufacturing practices, field alerts, recalls and numerous post-market issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s foremost cardiovascular institutes and some of the leading interventional cardiologists in responding to deficiencies identified during FDA inspections and developing appropriate corrective action to avoid further FDA regulatory enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a device manufacturer in obtaining expedited PMA review and approval in 90 days for a first-of-a-kind device to treat aneurysms in the renal vascular arteries. Successfully obtained approval for a major PMA supplement for the same product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a device manufacturer and coordinated an extensive product investigation into reported failures of an implantable device featuring sophisticated failure analyses and clinical assessments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted extensive training on FDA regulatory, IRB and protocol requirements for clinical investigators participating in the study of implantable devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAssisted numerous companies in preparing for FDA inspections, developing responses to FDA observations (FDA-483 forms) and warning letters related to manufacturing practices, quality systems, adverse event reporting, deviations from approved drug master files and manufacturing processes, and a variety of other regulatory matters. Assisted these companies in preparing for meetings with FDA compliance officials in District Offices, centers for drugs and devices, and the Office of Chief Counsel.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized by Super Lawyers as Top Rated FDA Attorney ","detail":"Law \u0026 Politics, 2007, 2010–2011, 2013–2017"},{"title":"Ranked Among the Best Life Sciences Lawyers in the U.S. ","detail":"Legal 500, 2016"},{"title":"Named Life Sciences Star ","detail":"LMG Life Sciences, 2012–2016"},{"title":"Recognized as one of Washington’s Best Lawyers ","detail":"Washingtonian magazine, 2004–2016"},{"title":"Superior Achievement Award ","detail":"U.S. Department of Health \u0026 Human Services, 1992"},{"title":"Commendable Service Award ","detail":"FDA, 1992–1994"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":746}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:44.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:44.000Z","searchable_text":"Brown{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized by Super Lawyers as Top Rated FDA Attorney \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law \u0026amp; Politics, 2007, 2010–2011, 2013–2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked Among the Best Life Sciences Lawyers in the U.S. \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Life Sciences Star \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LMG Life Sciences, 2012–2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as one of Washington’s Best Lawyers \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washingtonian magazine, 2004–2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Superior Achievement Award \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"U.S. Department of Health \u0026amp; Human Services, 1992\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Commendable Service Award \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"FDA, 1992–1994\"}{{ FIELD }}Phillip Morris USA v. FDA, 202 F.Supp. 3d (D.D.C. 2016). Represented one of the plaintiffs in a successful legal challenge to an FDA guidance governing the Substantial Equivalence Review process for tobacco products.{{ FIELD }}United States v. Franck's Lab, 2011 WL 4031102 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 12, 2011). Lead counsel in successful defense of FDA enforcement action against pharmacy compounder of veterinary drugs.{{ FIELD }}During his 30-year career, he has served as lead counsel and negotiator for numerous consent decrees of injunction, both during his tenure with FDA (1990–1994), and since 1994 in private practice. For example, he has negotiated consent decrees some of the world's largest device manufacturers, including Medtronic (2008 and 2015), The General Electric Company (2007) and Baxter Healthcare (2006).{{ FIELD }}Since 2002, served on the national counsel team for GlaxoSmithKline in the Paxil Products Liability Litigation. Represented GSK on all FDA-related issues, including federal preemption. Argued and won a summary judgment motion on federal preemption grounds in O'Neal v. SmithKline Beecham (E.D. Cal 2008). In 2002, represented GSK in successfully defending an injunction seeking to enjoin GSK from making claims in direct-to-consumer television advertising for Paxil.{{ FIELD }}From 1995 to 2001, served on 3M's National Trial Team in the Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implant Litigation. Responsible for virtually all FDA issues and had primary responsibility for preparation and handling of defense expert witnesses, and cross-examination of adverse witnesses on FDA issues.{{ FIELD }}Connaught Laboratories v. SmithKline Beecham, 7 F.Supp. 2d 477 (D.Del. 1998), appeal dismissed, 165 F.3d 1368 (1999). Represented SmithKline Beecham in winning one of the few successful motions to compel FDA to provide testimony by its research scientists in patent litigation relating to purified form of pertactin, a component of the pertussis vaccine.{{ FIELD }}Next Nutrition, Inc. v. SportPharma USA, Inc., No. 97-CV-1898J (1997). Served as lead counsel to a dietary supplement company that brought an action under the Lanham Act alleging false and misleading comparative advertising relating to competing products. Successfully negotiated a favorable settlement by obtaining a consent decree of permanent injunction and a damage award.{{ FIELD }}Represented pharmaceutical manufacturers in grand jury investigations regarding data integrity concerns in regulatory submissions to FDA, and alleged cGMP violations. In both cases, the U.S. Department of Justice declined to prosecute the company and individuals under investigation.{{ FIELD }}Conducted internal investigations into the sales and marketing practices of multiple international pharmaceutical and biotech companies to develop a risk profile and recommendations for reducing potential liability and risk exposure.{{ FIELD }}Conducted comprehensive prelaunch risk assessments for a Top 10 pharmaceutical company’s blockbuster drug to identify potential medical, scientific, regulatory and products liability risk areas.{{ FIELD }}Conducted a risk assessment for a top tier biotechnology company’s drug safety system to identify areas for possible improvement in pharmacovigilence planning, postmarket signal detection and investigation, and business decision-making.{{ FIELD }}Led numerous internal investigations for biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers into allegations made by current and former employees regarding product integrity issues, sales and marketing activities, and manufacturing quality issues.{{ FIELD }}Represented several drug and device manufacturers concerning product approvals, and in responding to FDA requests for information relating to promotion and advertising, manufacturing practices, field alerts, recalls and numerous post-market issues.{{ FIELD }}Represented one of the nation’s foremost cardiovascular institutes and some of the leading interventional cardiologists in responding to deficiencies identified during FDA inspections and developing appropriate corrective action to avoid further FDA regulatory enforcement.{{ FIELD }}Represented a device manufacturer in obtaining expedited PMA review and approval in 90 days for a first-of-a-kind device to treat aneurysms in the renal vascular arteries. Successfully obtained approval for a major PMA supplement for the same product.{{ FIELD }}Represented a device manufacturer and coordinated an extensive product investigation into reported failures of an implantable device featuring sophisticated failure analyses and clinical assessments.{{ FIELD }}Conducted extensive training on FDA regulatory, IRB and protocol requirements for clinical investigators participating in the study of implantable devices.{{ FIELD }}Assisted numerous companies in preparing for FDA inspections, developing responses to FDA observations (FDA-483 forms) and warning letters related to manufacturing practices, quality systems, adverse event reporting, deviations from approved drug master files and manufacturing processes, and a variety of other regulatory matters. Assisted these companies in preparing for meetings with FDA compliance officials in District Offices, centers for drugs and devices, and the Office of Chief Counsel.{{ FIELD }}Mark Brown is nationally recognized in Food \u0026amp; Drug Administration regulatory matters, civil litigation, criminal investigations and prosecutions, compliance matters and comprehensive risk assessments. Mark advises pharmaceutical, medical device and biotech companies, and pharmacies, on a broad range of FDA requirements and FDA regulatory issues that arise in products liability litigation and other disputes. A former Associate Chief Counsel for FDA, Mark is the Chair of the FDA and Life Sciences practice.\nMark has developed a national reputation for successfully resolving difficult and complex FDA compliance matters and enforcement actions. For pharmaceutical, medical device and food companies, and pharmacies, he has successfully negotiated and managed numerous complex consent decrees of injunction, successfully defended an injunction action brought by FDA, and persuaded the government not to bring enforcement actions in other civil and criminal matters.\nMark regularly counsels clients on drug safety issues, clinical trials, adverse event reporting, quality systems and manufacturing practices for drugs and devices. He also provides guidance concerning product failure investigations, factory inspections, recalls, product labeling, drug compounding, advertising, promotion, sales and marketing practices, and regularly advises clients on strategies for obtaining FDA approval and clearance for medical products.\nMark also handles FDA-related issues in product liability and commercial litigation. He was an architect of the preemption defense for both pharmaceutical and medical device clients, developing supporting evidence, briefing and arguing federal preemption motions in various federal and state courts.\nBefore joining the FDA, Mark was an attorney in the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission, where he concentrated on consumer fraud, healthcare advertising and promotional activities. He developed FTC enforcement actions against weight-loss centers, in vitro fertilization clinics and Northern Virginia infertility doctor Cecil B. Jacobson, who was later convicted of defrauding patients. Mark S Brown Partner Recognized by Super Lawyers as Top Rated FDA Attorney  Law \u0026amp; Politics, 2007, 2010–2011, 2013–2017 Ranked Among the Best Life Sciences Lawyers in the U.S.  Legal 500, 2016 Named Life Sciences Star  LMG Life Sciences, 2012–2016 Recognized as one of Washington’s Best Lawyers  Washingtonian magazine, 2004–2016 Superior Achievement Award  U.S. Department of Health \u0026amp; Human Services, 1992 Commendable Service Award  FDA, 1992–1994 University of Michigan University of Michigan Law School St. Louis University  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin District of Columbia Maryland Pennsylvania District of Columbia Bar Maryland State Bar Phillip Morris USA v. FDA, 202 F.Supp. 3d (D.D.C. 2016). Represented one of the plaintiffs in a successful legal challenge to an FDA guidance governing the Substantial Equivalence Review process for tobacco products. United States v. Franck's Lab, 2011 WL 4031102 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 12, 2011). Lead counsel in successful defense of FDA enforcement action against pharmacy compounder of veterinary drugs. During his 30-year career, he has served as lead counsel and negotiator for numerous consent decrees of injunction, both during his tenure with FDA (1990–1994), and since 1994 in private practice. For example, he has negotiated consent decrees some of the world's largest device manufacturers, including Medtronic (2008 and 2015), The General Electric Company (2007) and Baxter Healthcare (2006). Since 2002, served on the national counsel team for GlaxoSmithKline in the Paxil Products Liability Litigation. Represented GSK on all FDA-related issues, including federal preemption. Argued and won a summary judgment motion on federal preemption grounds in O'Neal v. SmithKline Beecham (E.D. Cal 2008). In 2002, represented GSK in successfully defending an injunction seeking to enjoin GSK from making claims in direct-to-consumer television advertising for Paxil. From 1995 to 2001, served on 3M's National Trial Team in the Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implant Litigation. Responsible for virtually all FDA issues and had primary responsibility for preparation and handling of defense expert witnesses, and cross-examination of adverse witnesses on FDA issues. Connaught Laboratories v. SmithKline Beecham, 7 F.Supp. 2d 477 (D.Del. 1998), appeal dismissed, 165 F.3d 1368 (1999). Represented SmithKline Beecham in winning one of the few successful motions to compel FDA to provide testimony by its research scientists in patent litigation relating to purified form of pertactin, a component of the pertussis vaccine. Next Nutrition, Inc. v. SportPharma USA, Inc., No. 97-CV-1898J (1997). Served as lead counsel to a dietary supplement company that brought an action under the Lanham Act alleging false and misleading comparative advertising relating to competing products. Successfully negotiated a favorable settlement by obtaining a consent decree of permanent injunction and a damage award. Represented pharmaceutical manufacturers in grand jury investigations regarding data integrity concerns in regulatory submissions to FDA, and alleged cGMP violations. In both cases, the U.S. Department of Justice declined to prosecute the company and individuals under investigation. Conducted internal investigations into the sales and marketing practices of multiple international pharmaceutical and biotech companies to develop a risk profile and recommendations for reducing potential liability and risk exposure. Conducted comprehensive prelaunch risk assessments for a Top 10 pharmaceutical company’s blockbuster drug to identify potential medical, scientific, regulatory and products liability risk areas. Conducted a risk assessment for a top tier biotechnology company’s drug safety system to identify areas for possible improvement in pharmacovigilence planning, postmarket signal detection and investigation, and business decision-making. Led numerous internal investigations for biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers into allegations made by current and former employees regarding product integrity issues, sales and marketing activities, and manufacturing quality issues. Represented several drug and device manufacturers concerning product approvals, and in responding to FDA requests for information relating to promotion and advertising, manufacturing practices, field alerts, recalls and numerous post-market issues. Represented one of the nation’s foremost cardiovascular institutes and some of the leading interventional cardiologists in responding to deficiencies identified during FDA inspections and developing appropriate corrective action to avoid further FDA regulatory enforcement. Represented a device manufacturer in obtaining expedited PMA review and approval in 90 days for a first-of-a-kind device to treat aneurysms in the renal vascular arteries. Successfully obtained approval for a major PMA supplement for the same product. Represented a device manufacturer and coordinated an extensive product investigation into reported failures of an implantable device featuring sophisticated failure analyses and clinical assessments. Conducted extensive training on FDA regulatory, IRB and protocol requirements for clinical investigators participating in the study of implantable devices. Assisted numerous companies in preparing for FDA inspections, developing responses to FDA observations (FDA-483 forms) and warning letters related to manufacturing practices, quality systems, adverse event reporting, deviations from approved drug master files and manufacturing processes, and a variety of other regulatory matters. Assisted these companies in preparing for meetings with FDA compliance officials in District Offices, centers for drugs and devices, and the Office of Chief Counsel.","searchable_name":"Mark S. Brown","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":196,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":427629,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1020,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJeff Bucholtz focuses on appeals and legal issues before federal and state courts across the country. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law and Contracts and Business Torts practices, Jeff represents clients in a wide range of civil, regulatory and criminal matters.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJeff has argued over 40 appeals spanning nearly every federal circuit and several state courts, including two arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court. Jeff's experience extends to a wide range of subject areas, including False Claims Act investigations and litigation, First Amendment and other constitutional issues, product liability litigation, administrative law, and many other types of business litigation. Jeff has particular expertise in Life Sciences and represents numerous FDA-regulated companies in civil, regulatory and criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePreviously, Jeff served at the U.S. Department of Justice in a number of senior roles, including the Acting Assistant Attorney General and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, the department\u0026rsquo;s largest litigating division. Jeff was also the Deputy Assistant Attorney General overseeing the Consumer Protection Branch, which brings criminal and civil enforcement actions on behalf of FDA and defends FDA in administrative law challenges, as well as the Torts Branch, which defends constitutional and common-law tort claims against the government and federal employees and officers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJeff represents clients in a variety of industries in appeals as well as trial court litigation, and government investigations and regulatory matters that require exceptional legal analysis and creative and strategic advocacy.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"jeffrey-bucholtz","email":"jbucholtz@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eVascular Solutions\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense of a federal criminal prosecution in Texas alleging off-label promotion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePandora Media\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense in the Second Circuit of an important rate-court decision against ASCAP.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eChevron\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful action in DC federal court to confirm a $100M international arbitral award against Ecuador.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA KBR subsidiary\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful action in NY federal court to confirm a $400M international arbitral award against Mexico's state oil company, despite a Mexican court's annulment of the award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eHuntington Ingalls\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining dismissal (and affirmance on appeal and the denial of certiorari) of a qui tam suit under the False Claims Act in Mississippi, based on the relator's ethical violations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSeveral leading companies\u003c/strong\u003e in life sciences, healthcare, transportation, and other sectors in defense of criminal and civil government investigations, obtaining declinations of criminal charges, dismissal of False Claims Act claims, and favorable resolutions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eAllergan\u003c/strong\u003e in its First Amendment declaratory judgment action challenging the government\u0026rsquo;s restrictions on truthful speech about off-label uses of FDA-approved drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eR.J. Reynolds\u003c/strong\u003e in several successful appeals in product liability cases in state courts in Florida and Missouri.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e in opposing plaintiffs' lawyers' attempts to bring large numbers of claims in jurisdictions having no relationship to the claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA DEA agent\u003c/strong\u003e in successfully obtaining a grant of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court and then reversal after oral argument in Walden v. Fiore, a case presenting important issues of personal jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA medical imaging provider\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Sixth Circuit appeal of an adverse judgment in a government-intervened False Claims Act case.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSeveral hospitals in a successful DC Circuit appeal seeking relief for CMS\u0026rsquo;s erroneous adjustments to hospitals' payments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePODS\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining a favorable settlement in an Eleventh Circuit appeal of a trademark infringement action against a competitor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eAllergan\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eShire\u003c/strong\u003e in separate Lanham Act false advertising cases against competitors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA software company\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Ninth Circuit appeal of an order refusing to compel arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEquifax\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Fourth Circuit appeal of an order granting class certification.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTwo wrongfully convicted individuals\u003c/strong\u003e who spent 25 years in prison, in a civil rights action against the prosecutors who framed them for murder, after the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether prosecutorial immunity barred our clients\u0026rsquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGE Capital Aviation Services\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Alabama Supreme Court appeal of a large punitive damages award in a commercial dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA large REIT\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Eleventh Circuit appeal of a class certification order in a securities case.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA dietary supplement manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense of an Eleventh Circuit appeal by the FTC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA leading chemical company\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining a favorable settlement of a Second Circuit appeal in a CERCLA action.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":105}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Bucholtz","nick_name":"Jeffrey","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit","years_held":"1996 - 1997"},{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Stephen V. Wilson, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California","years_held":"1995 - 1996"}],"first_name":"Jeffrey","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"S.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Firm of the Year for Supreme Court and Appellate Practice ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015"},{"title":"Practice of the Year, Appellate practice ","detail":"Law360, 2014"},{"title":"Exemplar of Good Legal Writing, for a Supreme Court brief ","detail":"Green Bag, 2013"},{"title":"Litigator of the Week, for Second Circuit Win for Pandora Media ","detail":"American Lawyer, 2015"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJeff Bucholtz focuses on appeals and legal issues before federal and state courts across the country. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law and Contracts and Business Torts practices, Jeff represents clients in a wide range of civil, regulatory and criminal matters.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJeff has argued over 40 appeals spanning nearly every federal circuit and several state courts, including two arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court. Jeff's experience extends to a wide range of subject areas, including False Claims Act investigations and litigation, First Amendment and other constitutional issues, product liability litigation, administrative law, and many other types of business litigation. Jeff has particular expertise in Life Sciences and represents numerous FDA-regulated companies in civil, regulatory and criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePreviously, Jeff served at the U.S. Department of Justice in a number of senior roles, including the Acting Assistant Attorney General and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, the department\u0026rsquo;s largest litigating division. Jeff was also the Deputy Assistant Attorney General overseeing the Consumer Protection Branch, which brings criminal and civil enforcement actions on behalf of FDA and defends FDA in administrative law challenges, as well as the Torts Branch, which defends constitutional and common-law tort claims against the government and federal employees and officers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJeff represents clients in a variety of industries in appeals as well as trial court litigation, and government investigations and regulatory matters that require exceptional legal analysis and creative and strategic advocacy.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eVascular Solutions\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense of a federal criminal prosecution in Texas alleging off-label promotion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePandora Media\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense in the Second Circuit of an important rate-court decision against ASCAP.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eChevron\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful action in DC federal court to confirm a $100M international arbitral award against Ecuador.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA KBR subsidiary\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful action in NY federal court to confirm a $400M international arbitral award against Mexico's state oil company, despite a Mexican court's annulment of the award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eHuntington Ingalls\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining dismissal (and affirmance on appeal and the denial of certiorari) of a qui tam suit under the False Claims Act in Mississippi, based on the relator's ethical violations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSeveral leading companies\u003c/strong\u003e in life sciences, healthcare, transportation, and other sectors in defense of criminal and civil government investigations, obtaining declinations of criminal charges, dismissal of False Claims Act claims, and favorable resolutions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eAllergan\u003c/strong\u003e in its First Amendment declaratory judgment action challenging the government\u0026rsquo;s restrictions on truthful speech about off-label uses of FDA-approved drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eR.J. Reynolds\u003c/strong\u003e in several successful appeals in product liability cases in state courts in Florida and Missouri.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e in opposing plaintiffs' lawyers' attempts to bring large numbers of claims in jurisdictions having no relationship to the claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA DEA agent\u003c/strong\u003e in successfully obtaining a grant of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court and then reversal after oral argument in Walden v. Fiore, a case presenting important issues of personal jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA medical imaging provider\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Sixth Circuit appeal of an adverse judgment in a government-intervened False Claims Act case.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSeveral hospitals in a successful DC Circuit appeal seeking relief for CMS\u0026rsquo;s erroneous adjustments to hospitals' payments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePODS\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining a favorable settlement in an Eleventh Circuit appeal of a trademark infringement action against a competitor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eAllergan\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eShire\u003c/strong\u003e in separate Lanham Act false advertising cases against competitors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA software company\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Ninth Circuit appeal of an order refusing to compel arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEquifax\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Fourth Circuit appeal of an order granting class certification.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTwo wrongfully convicted individuals\u003c/strong\u003e who spent 25 years in prison, in a civil rights action against the prosecutors who framed them for murder, after the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether prosecutorial immunity barred our clients\u0026rsquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGE Capital Aviation Services\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Alabama Supreme Court appeal of a large punitive damages award in a commercial dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA large REIT\u003c/strong\u003e in a successful Eleventh Circuit appeal of a class certification order in a securities case.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA dietary supplement manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in successful defense of an Eleventh Circuit appeal by the FTC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eA leading chemical company\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining a favorable settlement of a Second Circuit appeal in a CERCLA action.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Firm of the Year for Supreme Court and Appellate Practice ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015"},{"title":"Practice of the Year, Appellate practice ","detail":"Law360, 2014"},{"title":"Exemplar of Good Legal Writing, for a Supreme Court brief ","detail":"Green Bag, 2013"},{"title":"Litigator of the Week, for Second Circuit Win for Pandora Media ","detail":"American Lawyer, 2015"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":749}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T05:02:57.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T05:02:57.000Z","searchable_text":"Bucholtz{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Firm of the Year for Supreme Court and Appellate Practice \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Practice of the Year, Appellate practice \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2014\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Exemplar of Good Legal Writing, for a Supreme Court brief \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Green Bag, 2013\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigator of the Week, for Second Circuit Win for Pandora Media \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"American Lawyer, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}Vascular Solutions in successful defense of a federal criminal prosecution in Texas alleging off-label promotion.{{ FIELD }}Pandora Media in successful defense in the Second Circuit of an important rate-court decision against ASCAP.{{ FIELD }}Chevron in a successful action in DC federal court to confirm a $100M international arbitral award against Ecuador.{{ FIELD }}A KBR subsidiary in a successful action in NY federal court to confirm a $400M international arbitral award against Mexico's state oil company, despite a Mexican court's annulment of the award.{{ FIELD }}Huntington Ingalls in obtaining dismissal (and affirmance on appeal and the denial of certiorari) of a qui tam suit under the False Claims Act in Mississippi, based on the relator's ethical violations.{{ FIELD }}Several leading companies in life sciences, healthcare, transportation, and other sectors in defense of criminal and civil government investigations, obtaining declinations of criminal charges, dismissal of False Claims Act claims, and favorable resolutions.{{ FIELD }}Allergan in its First Amendment declaratory judgment action challenging the government’s restrictions on truthful speech about off-label uses of FDA-approved drugs.{{ FIELD }}R.J. Reynolds in several successful appeals in product liability cases in state courts in Florida and Missouri.{{ FIELD }}GlaxoSmithKline in opposing plaintiffs' lawyers' attempts to bring large numbers of claims in jurisdictions having no relationship to the claims.{{ FIELD }}A DEA agent in successfully obtaining a grant of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court and then reversal after oral argument in Walden v. Fiore, a case presenting important issues of personal jurisdiction.{{ FIELD }}A medical imaging provider in a successful Sixth Circuit appeal of an adverse judgment in a government-intervened False Claims Act case.{{ FIELD }}Several hospitals in a successful DC Circuit appeal seeking relief for CMS’s erroneous adjustments to hospitals' payments.{{ FIELD }}PODS in obtaining a favorable settlement in an Eleventh Circuit appeal of a trademark infringement action against a competitor.{{ FIELD }}Allergan and Shire in separate Lanham Act false advertising cases against competitors.{{ FIELD }}A software company in a successful Ninth Circuit appeal of an order refusing to compel arbitration.{{ FIELD }}Equifax in a successful Fourth Circuit appeal of an order granting class certification.{{ FIELD }}Two wrongfully convicted individuals who spent 25 years in prison, in a civil rights action against the prosecutors who framed them for murder, after the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether prosecutorial immunity barred our clients’ claims.{{ FIELD }}GE Capital Aviation Services in a successful Alabama Supreme Court appeal of a large punitive damages award in a commercial dispute.{{ FIELD }}A large REIT in a successful Eleventh Circuit appeal of a class certification order in a securities case.{{ FIELD }}A dietary supplement manufacturer in successful defense of an Eleventh Circuit appeal by the FTC.{{ FIELD }}A leading chemical company in obtaining a favorable settlement of a Second Circuit appeal in a CERCLA action.{{ FIELD }}Jeff Bucholtz focuses on appeals and legal issues before federal and state courts across the country. As a partner in our Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law and Contracts and Business Torts practices, Jeff represents clients in a wide range of civil, regulatory and criminal matters.\nJeff has argued over 40 appeals spanning nearly every federal circuit and several state courts, including two arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court. Jeff's experience extends to a wide range of subject areas, including False Claims Act investigations and litigation, First Amendment and other constitutional issues, product liability litigation, administrative law, and many other types of business litigation. Jeff has particular expertise in Life Sciences and represents numerous FDA-regulated companies in civil, regulatory and criminal matters.\nPreviously, Jeff served at the U.S. Department of Justice in a number of senior roles, including the Acting Assistant Attorney General and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, the department’s largest litigating division. Jeff was also the Deputy Assistant Attorney General overseeing the Consumer Protection Branch, which brings criminal and civil enforcement actions on behalf of FDA and defends FDA in administrative law challenges, as well as the Torts Branch, which defends constitutional and common-law tort claims against the government and federal employees and officers.\nJeff represents clients in a variety of industries in appeals as well as trial court litigation, and government investigations and regulatory matters that require exceptional legal analysis and creative and strategic advocacy. Jeffrey S Bucholtz Partner Firm of the Year for Supreme Court and Appellate Practice  Legal 500, 2015 Practice of the Year, Appellate practice  Law360, 2014 Exemplar of Good Legal Writing, for a Supreme Court brief  Green Bag, 2013 Litigator of the Week, for Second Circuit Win for Pandora Media  American Lawyer, 2015 University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law School Harvard University Harvard Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia District of Columbia Virginia Judicial Clerk, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Judicial Clerk, Stephen V. Wilson, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Vascular Solutions in successful defense of a federal criminal prosecution in Texas alleging off-label promotion. Pandora Media in successful defense in the Second Circuit of an important rate-court decision against ASCAP. Chevron in a successful action in DC federal court to confirm a $100M international arbitral award against Ecuador. A KBR subsidiary in a successful action in NY federal court to confirm a $400M international arbitral award against Mexico's state oil company, despite a Mexican court's annulment of the award. Huntington Ingalls in obtaining dismissal (and affirmance on appeal and the denial of certiorari) of a qui tam suit under the False Claims Act in Mississippi, based on the relator's ethical violations. Several leading companies in life sciences, healthcare, transportation, and other sectors in defense of criminal and civil government investigations, obtaining declinations of criminal charges, dismissal of False Claims Act claims, and favorable resolutions. Allergan in its First Amendment declaratory judgment action challenging the government’s restrictions on truthful speech about off-label uses of FDA-approved drugs. R.J. Reynolds in several successful appeals in product liability cases in state courts in Florida and Missouri. GlaxoSmithKline in opposing plaintiffs' lawyers' attempts to bring large numbers of claims in jurisdictions having no relationship to the claims. A DEA agent in successfully obtaining a grant of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court and then reversal after oral argument in Walden v. Fiore, a case presenting important issues of personal jurisdiction. A medical imaging provider in a successful Sixth Circuit appeal of an adverse judgment in a government-intervened False Claims Act case. Several hospitals in a successful DC Circuit appeal seeking relief for CMS’s erroneous adjustments to hospitals' payments. PODS in obtaining a favorable settlement in an Eleventh Circuit appeal of a trademark infringement action against a competitor. Allergan and Shire in separate Lanham Act false advertising cases against competitors. A software company in a successful Ninth Circuit appeal of an order refusing to compel arbitration. Equifax in a successful Fourth Circuit appeal of an order granting class certification. Two wrongfully convicted individuals who spent 25 years in prison, in a civil rights action against the prosecutors who framed them for murder, after the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether prosecutorial immunity barred our clients’ claims. GE Capital Aviation Services in a successful Alabama Supreme Court appeal of a large punitive damages award in a commercial dispute. A large REIT in a successful Eleventh Circuit appeal of a class certification order in a securities case. A dietary supplement manufacturer in successful defense of an Eleventh Circuit appeal by the FTC. A leading chemical company in obtaining a favorable settlement of a Second Circuit appeal in a CERCLA action.","searchable_name":"Jeffrey S. Bucholtz","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":436448,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":4101,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eHeather Ba\u0026ntilde;uelos\u0026nbsp;is Counsel in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Washington, DC office and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s FDA \u0026amp; Life Sciences practice group. Her practice focuses on regulatory strategies and initiatives for the labeling,\u0026nbsp;advertising and promotion\u0026nbsp;of FDA-regulated products: prescription and OTC drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, foods, and dietary supplements. Heather has served as the legal and/or regulatory member on dozens of promotional review committees and medical and scientific review committees, with a knack for practical advice and recommendations to help clients find a successful path forward.\u0026nbsp;She is also a frequent speaker on advertising and promotion issues at industry conferences and client training.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather\u0026rsquo;s experience in FDA law spans over 20 years and includes positions as a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Office of the Chief Counsel and senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. Her experiences in government and in-house give her a unique and valuable perspective as outside counsel.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Office of the Chief Counsel, Heather advised the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition on various matters pertaining to the regulation of food, dietary supplements and cosmetics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather has also served as senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. In these positions, she was responsible for advising on domestic and international regulatory and legal matters, such as the development, marketing and labeling of products, competitor issues, recalls and market withdrawals, and promotion and advertising, among others.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather graduated from the University of Southern California School of Law, where she served as an editorial member of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSouthern California Law Review\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and on the Board of Directors for the Public Interest Law Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"heather-banuelos","email":"hbanuelos@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":105,"guid":"105.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Banuelos","nick_name":"Heather","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Heather","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[{"id":2389,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2000-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/heatherbanuelos/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":14,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eHeather Ba\u0026ntilde;uelos\u0026nbsp;is Counsel in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Washington, DC office and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s FDA \u0026amp; Life Sciences practice group. Her practice focuses on regulatory strategies and initiatives for the labeling,\u0026nbsp;advertising and promotion\u0026nbsp;of FDA-regulated products: prescription and OTC drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, foods, and dietary supplements. Heather has served as the legal and/or regulatory member on dozens of promotional review committees and medical and scientific review committees, with a knack for practical advice and recommendations to help clients find a successful path forward.\u0026nbsp;She is also a frequent speaker on advertising and promotion issues at industry conferences and client training.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather\u0026rsquo;s experience in FDA law spans over 20 years and includes positions as a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Office of the Chief Counsel and senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. Her experiences in government and in-house give her a unique and valuable perspective as outside counsel.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Office of the Chief Counsel, Heather advised the FDA\u0026rsquo;s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition on various matters pertaining to the regulation of food, dietary supplements and cosmetics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather has also served as senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. In these positions, she was responsible for advising on domestic and international regulatory and legal matters, such as the development, marketing and labeling of products, competitor issues, recalls and market withdrawals, and promotion and advertising, among others.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeather graduated from the University of Southern California School of Law, where she served as an editorial member of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSouthern California Law Review\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and on the Board of Directors for the Public Interest Law Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6073}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:54:39.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:54:39.000Z","searchable_text":"Banuelos{{ FIELD }}Heather Bañuelos is Counsel in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Washington, DC office and a member of the firm’s FDA \u0026amp; Life Sciences practice group. Her practice focuses on regulatory strategies and initiatives for the labeling, advertising and promotion of FDA-regulated products: prescription and OTC drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, foods, and dietary supplements. Heather has served as the legal and/or regulatory member on dozens of promotional review committees and medical and scientific review committees, with a knack for practical advice and recommendations to help clients find a successful path forward. She is also a frequent speaker on advertising and promotion issues at industry conferences and client training.\nHeather’s experience in FDA law spans over 20 years and includes positions as a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA’s Office of the Chief Counsel and senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. Her experiences in government and in-house give her a unique and valuable perspective as outside counsel.\nAs a former Associate Chief Counsel in the FDA’s Office of the Chief Counsel, Heather advised the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition on various matters pertaining to the regulation of food, dietary supplements and cosmetics.\nHeather has also served as senior in-house regulatory counsel for multiple clients, including two large pharmaceutical companies and a leading food company. In these positions, she was responsible for advising on domestic and international regulatory and legal matters, such as the development, marketing and labeling of products, competitor issues, recalls and market withdrawals, and promotion and advertising, among others.\nHeather graduated from the University of Southern California School of Law, where she served as an editorial member of the Southern California Law Review and on the Board of Directors for the Public Interest Law Foundation. Counsel University of Southern California USC Gould School of Law University of Southern California USC Gould School of Law California District of Columbia Food and Drug Law Institute","searchable_name":"Heather Banuelos","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":447421,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7206,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmily Blackburn is a deal lawyer and litigator whose practice focuses on antitrust/competition matters and complex civil litigation.\u0026nbsp; She counsels companies in all aspects of merger clearance before the U.S. antitrust agencies and State attorneys general, represents them before federal and administrative courts in merger challenges and civil antitrust litigation, and provides sophisticated, pragmatic advice about transactions and business practices.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmily's experience spans a broad range of industries including healthcare, retail/supermarkets, distribution, consumer products, telecommunications and media, semiconductors, rail, aviation, defense and aerospace, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, e-commerce, and social media.\u0026nbsp; Before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, she was a\u0026nbsp;senior staff attorney in the Mergers I and Mergers IV divisions at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), where she led and worked on numerous complex, high-profile merger investigations and enforcement actions, including playing a key stand-up trial role in the FTC\u0026rsquo;s successful challenge to the \u003cem\u003eKroger/Albertsons\u003c/em\u003e supermarket merger.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe received the Bill Baer Award (the FTC's highest law enforcement honor)\u0026nbsp;for outstanding\u0026nbsp;contributions to the agency's competition mission as well as several awards for outstanding contributions to individual matters and agencywide initiatives.\u0026nbsp; She has also worked in the antitrust group of a global law firm in Washington, D.C. and as an economic consultant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr data-cke-eol=\"1\" /\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"emily-blackburn","email":"eblackburn@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3930}]},"expertise":[{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Blackburn","nick_name":"Emily","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Emily","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":755,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":null},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Received the Bill Baer Award for outstanding contributions to the agency's competition mission. - FTC, 2024","detail":"FTC, 2024"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":"Emily Blackburn is a counsel of our Business Litigation Practice Group. Read more.","primary_title_id":14,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmily Blackburn is a deal lawyer and litigator whose practice focuses on antitrust/competition matters and complex civil litigation.\u0026nbsp; She counsels companies in all aspects of merger clearance before the U.S. antitrust agencies and State attorneys general, represents them before federal and administrative courts in merger challenges and civil antitrust litigation, and provides sophisticated, pragmatic advice about transactions and business practices.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmily's experience spans a broad range of industries including healthcare, retail/supermarkets, distribution, consumer products, telecommunications and media, semiconductors, rail, aviation, defense and aerospace, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, e-commerce, and social media.\u0026nbsp; Before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, she was a\u0026nbsp;senior staff attorney in the Mergers I and Mergers IV divisions at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), where she led and worked on numerous complex, high-profile merger investigations and enforcement actions, including playing a key stand-up trial role in the FTC\u0026rsquo;s successful challenge to the \u003cem\u003eKroger/Albertsons\u003c/em\u003e supermarket merger.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe received the Bill Baer Award (the FTC's highest law enforcement honor)\u0026nbsp;for outstanding\u0026nbsp;contributions to the agency's competition mission as well as several awards for outstanding contributions to individual matters and agencywide initiatives.\u0026nbsp; She has also worked in the antitrust group of a global law firm in Washington, D.C. and as an economic consultant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr data-cke-eol=\"1\" /\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Received the Bill Baer Award for outstanding contributions to the agency's competition mission. - FTC, 2024","detail":"FTC, 2024"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13458}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-04-08T13:40:17.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-08T13:40:17.000Z","searchable_text":"Blackburn{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Received the Bill Baer Award for outstanding contributions to the agency's competition mission. - FTC, 2024\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"FTC, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }} \nEmily Blackburn is a deal lawyer and litigator whose practice focuses on antitrust/competition matters and complex civil litigation.  She counsels companies in all aspects of merger clearance before the U.S. antitrust agencies and State attorneys general, represents them before federal and administrative courts in merger challenges and civil antitrust litigation, and provides sophisticated, pragmatic advice about transactions and business practices. \nEmily's experience spans a broad range of industries including healthcare, retail/supermarkets, distribution, consumer products, telecommunications and media, semiconductors, rail, aviation, defense and aerospace, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, e-commerce, and social media.  Before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, she was a senior staff attorney in the Mergers I and Mergers IV divisions at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), where she led and worked on numerous complex, high-profile merger investigations and enforcement actions, including playing a key stand-up trial role in the FTC’s successful challenge to the Kroger/Albertsons supermarket merger.\nShe received the Bill Baer Award (the FTC's highest law enforcement honor) for outstanding contributions to the agency's competition mission as well as several awards for outstanding contributions to individual matters and agencywide initiatives.  She has also worked in the antitrust group of a global law firm in Washington, D.C. and as an economic consultant.\n  Emily Blackburn counsel Counsel Received the Bill Baer Award for outstanding contributions to the agency's competition mission. - FTC, 2024 FTC, 2024 University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law School Georgetown University Georgetown University Law Center Supreme Court of the United States U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon District of Columbia New York","searchable_name":"Emily Blackburn","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":446876,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5648,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLucas\u0026nbsp;Barta's\u0026nbsp;practice focuses on counseling both early-stage and sophisticated clients in general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including venture financings, private and public mergers and acquisitions, and general corporate governance.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdmitted in Virginia and Washington, D.C.\u003c/em\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLucas Barta is a Senior Associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Northern Virginia Office. Lucas' practice focuses on advising clients on a broad range of general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including general corporate governance, negotiating debt and venture financings of small and large scale, private and public mergers and acquisitions, service arrangements, and other sophisticated transactions. Lucas\u0026rsquo; practice aims to provide clients with valuable counsel from formation to exit, and each step along the path. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLucas has represented the full range of parties across various transactions, including emerging and established companies, bidders, private equity groups, public companies, private investors, investment banks, and financing sources. Lucas has worked on transactions across a number of industries, including, among others, technology, healthcare, government contracts and services, environmental development, and regulated businesses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\"Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.\" \u003c/em\u003e- Client quote, Legal 500\u0026nbsp;2024\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"lucas-barta","email":"lbarta@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMantech\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon its acquisition of Elder Research, Inc., a trusted provider of AI and data science solutions, applications and training for Fortune 500 and U.S. government clients. The transaction was publicly announced on December 10, 2025 and builds on Mantech's proven experience in developing and delivering industry-leading AI and automation solutions at the speed and depth of mission need.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBooz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH)\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its acquisition of PAR Government Systems Corporation (PGSC), a wholly owned subsidiary of PAR Technology Corporation\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e(NYSE: PAR)\u003c/strong\u003e. PGSC delivers differentiated services and solutions in strategic mission areas, including the provision of real-time communications and mobile situational awareness to maintain battlespace dominance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSA Photonics, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its sale to CACI International in the fourth quarter of 2021. The transaction included a spin-off of certain lines of business and involved an Employee Stock Ownership plan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBlue Canyon Technologies, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale to Raytheon Company. Blue Canyon Technologies is a vertically integrated spacecraft manufacturer supporting nearly 40 unique missions with over 70 spacecraft. The transaction was publicly announced November 10, 2020 and closed on December 18, 2020.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDynetics, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale to Leidos for $1.65 billion. Dynetics, Inc. is an American applied science and information technology company headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama that provides high-technology, mission-critical services and solutions to the U.S. Government. The transaction was publicly announced on December 17, 2019 and consummated on January 31, 2020, and included an Employee Stock Ownership Plan.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":27,"guid":"27.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":32,"guid":"32.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1147,"guid":"1147.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":126,"guid":"126.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Barta","nick_name":"Lucas","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Lucas","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2484,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2017-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.”","detail":"Client quote, Legal 500 2024"},{"title":"M\u0026A/Corporate and Commercial - Venture Capital \u0026 Emerging Companies","detail":"Legal 500, 2024-2025"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucas-barta-5b962276/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":75,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLucas\u0026nbsp;Barta's\u0026nbsp;practice focuses on counseling both early-stage and sophisticated clients in general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including venture financings, private and public mergers and acquisitions, and general corporate governance.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdmitted in Virginia and Washington, D.C.\u003c/em\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLucas Barta is a Senior Associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Northern Virginia Office. Lucas' practice focuses on advising clients on a broad range of general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including general corporate governance, negotiating debt and venture financings of small and large scale, private and public mergers and acquisitions, service arrangements, and other sophisticated transactions. Lucas\u0026rsquo; practice aims to provide clients with valuable counsel from formation to exit, and each step along the path. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLucas has represented the full range of parties across various transactions, including emerging and established companies, bidders, private equity groups, public companies, private investors, investment banks, and financing sources. Lucas has worked on transactions across a number of industries, including, among others, technology, healthcare, government contracts and services, environmental development, and regulated businesses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\"Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.\" \u003c/em\u003e- Client quote, Legal 500\u0026nbsp;2024\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMantech\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon its acquisition of Elder Research, Inc., a trusted provider of AI and data science solutions, applications and training for Fortune 500 and U.S. government clients. The transaction was publicly announced on December 10, 2025 and builds on Mantech's proven experience in developing and delivering industry-leading AI and automation solutions at the speed and depth of mission need.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBooz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH)\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its acquisition of PAR Government Systems Corporation (PGSC), a wholly owned subsidiary of PAR Technology Corporation\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e(NYSE: PAR)\u003c/strong\u003e. PGSC delivers differentiated services and solutions in strategic mission areas, including the provision of real-time communications and mobile situational awareness to maintain battlespace dominance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSA Photonics, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its sale to CACI International in the fourth quarter of 2021. The transaction included a spin-off of certain lines of business and involved an Employee Stock Ownership plan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBlue Canyon Technologies, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale to Raytheon Company. Blue Canyon Technologies is a vertically integrated spacecraft manufacturer supporting nearly 40 unique missions with over 70 spacecraft. The transaction was publicly announced November 10, 2020 and closed on December 18, 2020.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDynetics, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its sale to Leidos for $1.65 billion. Dynetics, Inc. is an American applied science and information technology company headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama that provides high-technology, mission-critical services and solutions to the U.S. Government. The transaction was publicly announced on December 17, 2019 and consummated on January 31, 2020, and included an Employee Stock Ownership Plan.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.”","detail":"Client quote, Legal 500 2024"},{"title":"M\u0026A/Corporate and Commercial - Venture Capital \u0026 Emerging Companies","detail":"Legal 500, 2024-2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":7417}]},"capability_group_id":1},"created_at":"2026-03-20T13:44:12.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-20T13:44:12.000Z","searchable_text":"Barta{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Client quote, Legal 500 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"M\u0026amp;A/Corporate and Commercial - Venture Capital \u0026amp; Emerging Companies\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2024-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Advised Mantech on its acquisition of Elder Research, Inc., a trusted provider of AI and data science solutions, applications and training for Fortune 500 and U.S. government clients. The transaction was publicly announced on December 10, 2025 and builds on Mantech's proven experience in developing and delivering industry-leading AI and automation solutions at the speed and depth of mission need.{{ FIELD }}Advised Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH) on its acquisition of PAR Government Systems Corporation (PGSC), a wholly owned subsidiary of PAR Technology Corporation (NYSE: PAR). PGSC delivers differentiated services and solutions in strategic mission areas, including the provision of real-time communications and mobile situational awareness to maintain battlespace dominance.{{ FIELD }}Advised SA Photonics, Inc. on its sale to CACI International in the fourth quarter of 2021. The transaction included a spin-off of certain lines of business and involved an Employee Stock Ownership plan.{{ FIELD }}Advised Blue Canyon Technologies, Inc. in its sale to Raytheon Company. Blue Canyon Technologies is a vertically integrated spacecraft manufacturer supporting nearly 40 unique missions with over 70 spacecraft. The transaction was publicly announced November 10, 2020 and closed on December 18, 2020.{{ FIELD }}Advised Dynetics, Inc. in its sale to Leidos for $1.65 billion. Dynetics, Inc. is an American applied science and information technology company headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama that provides high-technology, mission-critical services and solutions to the U.S. Government. The transaction was publicly announced on December 17, 2019 and consummated on January 31, 2020, and included an Employee Stock Ownership Plan.{{ FIELD }}Lucas Barta's practice focuses on counseling both early-stage and sophisticated clients in general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including venture financings, private and public mergers and acquisitions, and general corporate governance. \nAdmitted in Virginia and Washington, D.C.\nLucas Barta is a Senior Associate in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Northern Virginia Office. Lucas' practice focuses on advising clients on a broad range of general corporate, technology, and transactional matters, including general corporate governance, negotiating debt and venture financings of small and large scale, private and public mergers and acquisitions, service arrangements, and other sophisticated transactions. Lucas’ practice aims to provide clients with valuable counsel from formation to exit, and each step along the path.  \nLucas has represented the full range of parties across various transactions, including emerging and established companies, bidders, private equity groups, public companies, private investors, investment banks, and financing sources. Lucas has worked on transactions across a number of industries, including, among others, technology, healthcare, government contracts and services, environmental development, and regulated businesses.\n\"Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.\" - Client quote, Legal 500 2024 Senior Associate “Lucas Barta is a highly responsive and knowledgeable associate who is able to deliver on our corporate legal requirements.” Client quote, Legal 500 2024 M\u0026amp;A/Corporate and Commercial - Venture Capital \u0026amp; Emerging Companies Legal 500, 2024-2025 Virginia Tech  Washington and Lee University Washington and Lee University School of Law District of Columbia Virginia Advised Mantech on its acquisition of Elder Research, Inc., a trusted provider of AI and data science solutions, applications and training for Fortune 500 and U.S. government clients. The transaction was publicly announced on December 10, 2025 and builds on Mantech's proven experience in developing and delivering industry-leading AI and automation solutions at the speed and depth of mission need. Advised Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH) on its acquisition of PAR Government Systems Corporation (PGSC), a wholly owned subsidiary of PAR Technology Corporation (NYSE: PAR). PGSC delivers differentiated services and solutions in strategic mission areas, including the provision of real-time communications and mobile situational awareness to maintain battlespace dominance. Advised SA Photonics, Inc. on its sale to CACI International in the fourth quarter of 2021. The transaction included a spin-off of certain lines of business and involved an Employee Stock Ownership plan. Advised Blue Canyon Technologies, Inc. in its sale to Raytheon Company. Blue Canyon Technologies is a vertically integrated spacecraft manufacturer supporting nearly 40 unique missions with over 70 spacecraft. The transaction was publicly announced November 10, 2020 and closed on December 18, 2020. Advised Dynetics, Inc. in its sale to Leidos for $1.65 billion. Dynetics, Inc. is an American applied science and information technology company headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama that provides high-technology, mission-critical services and solutions to the U.S. Government. The transaction was publicly announced on December 17, 2019 and consummated on January 31, 2020, and included an Employee Stock Ownership Plan.","searchable_name":"Lucas M. Barta","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":447329,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6585,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eZoe Beiner is a senior\u0026nbsp;associate in the Trial and Global Disputes practice and a member of the firm's Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law team.\u0026nbsp; Zoe represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation across a wide range of subject areas, including appeals, class actions, mass tort and commercial disputes, and federal constitutional law.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Zoe served as a law clerk to Judge Jay S. Bybee of the\u0026nbsp;United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit\u0026nbsp;and Judge Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Zoe received her law degree from Vanderbilt University Law School, where she served as the Senior Notes Editor for the Vanderbilt Law Review.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"zoe-beiner","email":"zbeiner@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Beiner","nick_name":"Zoe","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Jay S. Bybee, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","years_held":"2020 - 2021"},{"name":"Law Clerk, Leigh Martin May, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia","years_held":"2018 - 2020"}],"first_name":"Zoe","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2442,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2018-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":75,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eZoe Beiner is a senior\u0026nbsp;associate in the Trial and Global Disputes practice and a member of the firm's Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law team.\u0026nbsp; Zoe represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation across a wide range of subject areas, including appeals, class actions, mass tort and commercial disputes, and federal constitutional law.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Zoe served as a law clerk to Judge Jay S. Bybee of the\u0026nbsp;United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit\u0026nbsp;and Judge Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Zoe received her law degree from Vanderbilt University Law School, where she served as the Senior Notes Editor for the Vanderbilt Law Review.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11196}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-04-06T22:08:22.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-06T22:08:22.000Z","searchable_text":"Beiner{{ FIELD }}Zoe Beiner is a senior associate in the Trial and Global Disputes practice and a member of the firm's Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law team.  Zoe represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation across a wide range of subject areas, including appeals, class actions, mass tort and commercial disputes, and federal constitutional law. \nPrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Zoe served as a law clerk to Judge Jay S. Bybee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judge Leigh Martin May of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Zoe received her law degree from Vanderbilt University Law School, where she served as the Senior Notes Editor for the Vanderbilt Law Review. \n  Senior Associate University of Florida  Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University School of Law Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia District of Columbia Georgia Georgia Court of Appeals Supreme Court of Georgia Law Clerk, Jay S. Bybee, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Law Clerk, Leigh Martin May, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia","searchable_name":"Zoe Beiner","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":426566,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":4957,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eEdward A. Benoit is a senior\u0026nbsp;associate in the Trial and Global Disputes Practice Group in Washington, D.C.\u0026nbsp; Edward represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation at both the trial and appellate level.\u0026nbsp; Edward\u0026rsquo;s practice encompasses a wide range of subject areas, including putative consumer class actions, plaintiff- and defense-side commercial disputes, the False Claims Act, the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, ERISA, antitrust matters, and federal constitutional law.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Edward was a summer intern at the United States Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office for the Western District of New York.\u0026nbsp; Edward received his J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he was Managing Editor of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review and participated in the Predatory Lending and Consumer Protection Clinic and the Housing Clinic.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to law school, Edward was the Assistant to the Associate General Counsel for Fair Housing at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.\u0026nbsp; Edward also holds a B.A. in English and History from the State University of New York at Buffalo, \u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, where he won the Class of 1972 Prize for Best English Thesis and co-won the Horton Prize for Best History Thesis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"edward-benoit-17","email":"ebenoit@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Benoit","nick_name":"Edward","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Edward","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"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\u003eEdward A. Benoit is a senior\u0026nbsp;associate in the Trial and Global Disputes Practice Group in Washington, D.C.\u0026nbsp; Edward represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation at both the trial and appellate level.\u0026nbsp; Edward\u0026rsquo;s practice encompasses a wide range of subject areas, including putative consumer class actions, plaintiff- and defense-side commercial disputes, the False Claims Act, the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, ERISA, antitrust matters, and federal constitutional law.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Edward was a summer intern at the United States Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office for the Western District of New York.\u0026nbsp; Edward received his J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he was Managing Editor of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review and participated in the Predatory Lending and Consumer Protection Clinic and the Housing Clinic.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to law school, Edward was the Assistant to the Associate General Counsel for Fair Housing at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.\u0026nbsp; Edward also holds a B.A. in English and History from the State University of New York at Buffalo, \u003cem\u003esumma cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, where he won the Class of 1972 Prize for Best English Thesis and co-won the Horton Prize for Best History Thesis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":7190},{"id":7190},{"id":7190}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:54:47.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:54:47.000Z","searchable_text":"Benoit{{ FIELD }}Edward A. Benoit is a senior associate in the Trial and Global Disputes Practice Group in Washington, D.C.  Edward represents clients in complex, high-stakes civil litigation at both the trial and appellate level.  Edward’s practice encompasses a wide range of subject areas, including putative consumer class actions, plaintiff- and defense-side commercial disputes, the False Claims Act, the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, ERISA, antitrust matters, and federal constitutional law. \nBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Edward was a summer intern at the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of New York.  Edward received his J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he was Managing Editor of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review and participated in the Predatory Lending and Consumer Protection Clinic and the Housing Clinic. \nPrior to law school, Edward was the Assistant to the Associate General Counsel for Fair Housing at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.  Edward also holds a B.A. in English and History from the State University of New York at Buffalo, summa cum laude, where he won the Class of 1972 Prize for Best English Thesis and co-won the Horton Prize for Best History Thesis.\n  Senior Associate SUNY at Buffalo University at Buffalo Law School Harvard University Harvard Law School District of Columbia New York","searchable_name":"Edward Benoit","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}]}}