{"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":"28","capability_id":null,"extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":null,"per_page":12,"people":[{"id":445534,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7306,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNatalie Arbaugh is a trial lawyer with a passion for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence. Her extensive experience has led her to be recognized multiple times as one of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Top 250 Women in Litigation,\u0026rdquo; ranked by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003elisted in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;\u003c/em\u003e, selected to the Texas\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSuper Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;list, and named \u0026ldquo;Winning Woman\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNatalie represents plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of industries in state and federal courts throughout the country in complex\u0026mdash;and often high-profile\u0026mdash;business and intellectual property disputes. From handling breach of contract matters to trade secret litigation to class actions, she is skilled at distilling even the most complex of business disputes into a simple story that resonates with judges and juries alike. Her intellectual property practice focuses on trade secret and departing employee issues, including noncompete counseling and litigation, and trademark litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNatalie\u0026rsquo;s trial experience includes an eight-year case in which she co-counseled with the Texas Attorney General\u0026rsquo;s office to try one of the largest and most complex fraud cases in Texas history. Resulting in the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas, this record-breaking case led to her prior law firm being named a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Department of the Year\u0026rdquo; finalist and contributed to Natalie being named a \u0026ldquo;Winning Woman\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e. She also was a key member of the trial team for the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC against billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban. Following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court, the jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn an IP case covered by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e, Natalie obtained sanctions against her opponent after methodically building a case to show that the defendants falsified and modified evidence and committed perjury and fraud in an attempt to undermine her client\u0026rsquo;s trademark infringement claims and assert superior trademark rights. She decisively persuaded the court otherwise, and following a bench trial, obtained a $42 million judgment for her client. In awarding her client its attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees, the trial court judge stated, \u0026ldquo;Counsel\u0026rsquo;s skill and expertise has been evident throughout this litigation, and their performance under taxing circumstances has been impressive.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe most fulfilling aspect of Natalie\u0026rsquo;s career is the strong relationships she builds with her clients. They rely on her as a trusted legal advisor\u0026mdash;someone collaborative, innovative, and deeply invested in guiding them toward the best possible outcome, whether that means winning at trial, resolving a dispute early, or finding a creative business solution. Natalie understands that her clients need thoughtful, strategic counsel to navigate their most pressing challenges, and she treats their priorities as her own. She works closely with them to evaluate risks, make informed decisions, and resolve complex issues long before a case ever reaches the courtroom.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"natalie-arbaugh","email":"narbaugh@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrade Secret, Departing Employee and Trademark Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrademark/Copyright/Counterfeiting. Serves as lead counsel in trademark and copyright infringement matters for \u003cstrong\u003einternational luxury fashion brand owners\u003c/strong\u003e, including as part of their national anti-counterfeiting campaigns. Regularly manages litigations throughout Texas and the nation and consistently resolves cases on favorable terms\u0026mdash;through settlement, motion for summary judgment, or otherwise. She has led more than 100 matters through resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secrets. Regularly counsels clients in broad range of noncompete, non-solicitation, and departing employee issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003esoftware solutions company\u003c/strong\u003e, obtained an injunction prohibiting a competitor from using or disclosing client\u0026rsquo;s trade secret solutions in implementing solutions, tools, and technologies for the competitor\u0026rsquo;s customers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract. On behalf of \u003cstrong\u003ea global petrochemical company\u003c/strong\u003e, obtained temporary injunction against world\u0026rsquo;s third-largest chemical company in state court, alleging trade secret theft and breach of contract arising from defendant\u0026rsquo;s licensing of polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries. Case settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract/Inevitable Disclosure. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003eleading bank consulting and software services company\u003c/strong\u003e, brought suit against former senior principals and a competitor alleging theft of trade secrets and breach of fiduciary duty after an employee resigned under suspicious circumstances. Obtained a temporary restraining order against the former employee on theory of inevitable disclosure. Subsequently developed proof, through computer forensic evidence, of the employee\u0026rsquo;s transfer and use of thousands of client\u0026rsquo;s files, resulting in a temporary injunction which, among other things, prohibited former employee from using and disclosing the client\u0026rsquo;s trade secrets and other confidential information, from soliciting client\u0026rsquo;s customers and employees, and from working in competition with client in revenue enhancement. Settled the lawsuit on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Dress Infringement. Represented a \u003cstrong\u003ecooler and drink ware manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in series of litigations brought against it by competitor company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrademark Infringement. Successfully defended the \u003cstrong\u003eyellow pages and a marketing company\u003c/strong\u003e against a suit by a national competitor alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. Settled lawsuit on very favorable terms for nuisance value after presenting legal flaws to plaintiff.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQui Tam Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTexas Medicaid Fraud/Conspiracy to Breach Fiduciary Duty. Represented \u003cstrong\u003ea whistleblower\u003c/strong\u003e in co-prosecuting Medicaid fraud case with the State of Texas against one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest consumer health and pharmaceutical companies. Case settled for $158 million, the largest Medicaid recovery in the history of the State of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFalse Claims Act. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003epublicly traded human services provider\u003c/strong\u003e in a federal court FCA case in which the State of Texas sought $4 in damages. Lawsuit settled for a fraction of the claimed damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClass Action and Collective Action Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an \u003cstrong\u003eedible bouquet client\u003c/strong\u003e in defense of purported class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003ehotel chain\u003c/strong\u003e in defense of allegations of violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act and threat of class actions by several plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003eleading watch manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in the defense of class action claims of false advertising, deceptive practices, and related claims arising out of \u0026ldquo;Made in America\u0026rdquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers\u003c/strong\u003e in the consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company\u0026rsquo;s behalf. Case settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOther Commercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRegularly advises clients in all aspects of contract disputes, from negotiation of contracts to pre-suit disputes to litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Commissions Contract. Obtained a favorable jury verdict as second-chair trial counsel on behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers \u003c/strong\u003ein the consumer goods industry. A former employee alleged breach of commissions agreement against the client, which the jury denied. Case settled on very favorable terms after trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Disaster Recovery Contract. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003edisaster recovery and business continuity company\u003c/strong\u003e, brought suit in a federal court action alleging breach of disaster recovery agreement. Case settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFraud/Breach of Contract/Breach of Fiduciary Duty. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 semiconductor and digital signal processing company\u003c/strong\u003e in a lawsuit by a former employee and purchaser of the client\u0026rsquo;s business in which the purchaser claimed that the client misrepresented facts and breached an acquisition agreement in connection with the sale of the business. Settled the lawsuit for a fraction of the damages claimed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Computer Automation Contract. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading global semiconductor company\u003c/strong\u003e in a state court suit against allegations of breach of computer automation services contract. Settled the lawsuit on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEmployment and Collective Action Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eReverse Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003ecollege\u003c/strong\u003e against claims alleging reverse race discrimination under Title VII and breach of contract arising from termination of a professor. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHarassment/Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eglobal communications company\u003c/strong\u003e against claims in federal court alleging harassment in the workplace, race discrimination, defamation, and breach of contract arising from termination of employee. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAge Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers\u003c/strong\u003e in the consumer goods industry against claims alleging age discrimination. Obtained nuisance-value settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eGender Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003ecounty\u003c/strong\u003e against claims alleging gender discrimination. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePregnancy Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003emarketing company\u003c/strong\u003e against claim of pregnancy discrimination arising from termination of employee. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFLSA. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003eglobal insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e against claim alleging violation of and retaliation under Fair Labor Standards Act in connection with wages paid to employee, resulting in a favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFLSA Collective Action. Defended a l\u003cstrong\u003eeading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers \u003c/strong\u003ein consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company\u0026rsquo;s behalf. Case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReported Decisions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP. v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Slip Copy, 2015 WL 3916271 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2015) (obtained trebled damages\u0026nbsp;and judgment of over US$42M for defendants\u0026rsquo; willful infringement)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 13cv3669, 2014 WL 6850966, (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 2014) (obtained summary judgment in favor of Tory Burch on trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoach Inc. v. Sassy Couture\u003c/em\u003e, No. SA-10-CV-601-XR, 2012 WL 162366 (W.D. Tex. Jan 19, 2012) (obtained summary judgment on behalf of Coach Inc. on claims for trademark counterfeiting)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eINEOS Group Ltd. v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP\u003c/em\u003e; 312 S.W.3d 843 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (affirmed temporary injunction obtained on behalf of Chevron Phillips Chemical Company in case alleging breach of contract and theft of trade secrets)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKathi Bowman v. CROSSMARK, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 3:09-CV-16, 2010 WL 2837519 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2010) (obtained denial of conditional certification of class under the Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of CROSSMARK, Inc.)\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":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1203,"guid":"1203.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Arbaugh","nick_name":"Natalie","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Honorable Justice Deborah Hankinson, Texas Supreme Court","years_held":"2001 - 2002"}],"first_name":"Natalie","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":176,"law_schools":[{"id":1852,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2001-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":0,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"L.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Litigation: General Commercial—Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds","detail":"Chambers USA, 2023–2025"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Key Lawyer” for Intellectual Property: Trade Secrets, Litigation and Non-Contentious Matters","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2024–2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Intellectual Property Litigation and Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Trademark Law","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Texas Litigation Star” for General Commercial Litigation and for Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Listed in “Top 250 Women in Litigation” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Complex Commercial Litigation, IP, and Class Actions","detail":"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2024–2026 "},{"title":"Recognized for Plaintiff","detail":"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2026"},{"title":"Named a “Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Dallas, Texas” ","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017–2024"},{"title":"“Best Lawyer in Dallas” for Business Litigation","detail":"D Magazine, 2014–2022"},{"title":"“Top Women Attorneys in Texas” ","detail":"Texas Monthly, January 2020"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNatalie Arbaugh is a trial lawyer with a passion for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence. Her extensive experience has led her to be recognized multiple times as one of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Top 250 Women in Litigation,\u0026rdquo; ranked by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003elisted in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;\u003c/em\u003e, selected to the Texas\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSuper Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;list, and named \u0026ldquo;Winning Woman\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNatalie represents plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of industries in state and federal courts throughout the country in complex\u0026mdash;and often high-profile\u0026mdash;business and intellectual property disputes. From handling breach of contract matters to trade secret litigation to class actions, she is skilled at distilling even the most complex of business disputes into a simple story that resonates with judges and juries alike. Her intellectual property practice focuses on trade secret and departing employee issues, including noncompete counseling and litigation, and trademark litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNatalie\u0026rsquo;s trial experience includes an eight-year case in which she co-counseled with the Texas Attorney General\u0026rsquo;s office to try one of the largest and most complex fraud cases in Texas history. Resulting in the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas, this record-breaking case led to her prior law firm being named a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Department of the Year\u0026rdquo; finalist and contributed to Natalie being named a \u0026ldquo;Winning Woman\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e. She also was a key member of the trial team for the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC against billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban. Following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court, the jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn an IP case covered by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e, Natalie obtained sanctions against her opponent after methodically building a case to show that the defendants falsified and modified evidence and committed perjury and fraud in an attempt to undermine her client\u0026rsquo;s trademark infringement claims and assert superior trademark rights. She decisively persuaded the court otherwise, and following a bench trial, obtained a $42 million judgment for her client. In awarding her client its attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees, the trial court judge stated, \u0026ldquo;Counsel\u0026rsquo;s skill and expertise has been evident throughout this litigation, and their performance under taxing circumstances has been impressive.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe most fulfilling aspect of Natalie\u0026rsquo;s career is the strong relationships she builds with her clients. They rely on her as a trusted legal advisor\u0026mdash;someone collaborative, innovative, and deeply invested in guiding them toward the best possible outcome, whether that means winning at trial, resolving a dispute early, or finding a creative business solution. Natalie understands that her clients need thoughtful, strategic counsel to navigate their most pressing challenges, and she treats their priorities as her own. She works closely with them to evaluate risks, make informed decisions, and resolve complex issues long before a case ever reaches the courtroom.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrade Secret, Departing Employee and Trademark Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrademark/Copyright/Counterfeiting. Serves as lead counsel in trademark and copyright infringement matters for \u003cstrong\u003einternational luxury fashion brand owners\u003c/strong\u003e, including as part of their national anti-counterfeiting campaigns. Regularly manages litigations throughout Texas and the nation and consistently resolves cases on favorable terms\u0026mdash;through settlement, motion for summary judgment, or otherwise. She has led more than 100 matters through resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secrets. Regularly counsels clients in broad range of noncompete, non-solicitation, and departing employee issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003esoftware solutions company\u003c/strong\u003e, obtained an injunction prohibiting a competitor from using or disclosing client\u0026rsquo;s trade secret solutions in implementing solutions, tools, and technologies for the competitor\u0026rsquo;s customers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract. On behalf of \u003cstrong\u003ea global petrochemical company\u003c/strong\u003e, obtained temporary injunction against world\u0026rsquo;s third-largest chemical company in state court, alleging trade secret theft and breach of contract arising from defendant\u0026rsquo;s licensing of polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries. Case settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract/Inevitable Disclosure. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003eleading bank consulting and software services company\u003c/strong\u003e, brought suit against former senior principals and a competitor alleging theft of trade secrets and breach of fiduciary duty after an employee resigned under suspicious circumstances. Obtained a temporary restraining order against the former employee on theory of inevitable disclosure. Subsequently developed proof, through computer forensic evidence, of the employee\u0026rsquo;s transfer and use of thousands of client\u0026rsquo;s files, resulting in a temporary injunction which, among other things, prohibited former employee from using and disclosing the client\u0026rsquo;s trade secrets and other confidential information, from soliciting client\u0026rsquo;s customers and employees, and from working in competition with client in revenue enhancement. Settled the lawsuit on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrade Dress Infringement. Represented a \u003cstrong\u003ecooler and drink ware manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in series of litigations brought against it by competitor company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrademark Infringement. Successfully defended the \u003cstrong\u003eyellow pages and a marketing company\u003c/strong\u003e against a suit by a national competitor alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. Settled lawsuit on very favorable terms for nuisance value after presenting legal flaws to plaintiff.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQui Tam Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTexas Medicaid Fraud/Conspiracy to Breach Fiduciary Duty. Represented \u003cstrong\u003ea whistleblower\u003c/strong\u003e in co-prosecuting Medicaid fraud case with the State of Texas against one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest consumer health and pharmaceutical companies. Case settled for $158 million, the largest Medicaid recovery in the history of the State of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFalse Claims Act. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003epublicly traded human services provider\u003c/strong\u003e in a federal court FCA case in which the State of Texas sought $4 in damages. Lawsuit settled for a fraction of the claimed damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClass Action and Collective Action Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an \u003cstrong\u003eedible bouquet client\u003c/strong\u003e in defense of purported class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003ehotel chain\u003c/strong\u003e in defense of allegations of violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act and threat of class actions by several plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003eleading watch manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e in the defense of class action claims of false advertising, deceptive practices, and related claims arising out of \u0026ldquo;Made in America\u0026rdquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers\u003c/strong\u003e in the consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company\u0026rsquo;s behalf. Case settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOther Commercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRegularly advises clients in all aspects of contract disputes, from negotiation of contracts to pre-suit disputes to litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Commissions Contract. Obtained a favorable jury verdict as second-chair trial counsel on behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers \u003c/strong\u003ein the consumer goods industry. A former employee alleged breach of commissions agreement against the client, which the jury denied. Case settled on very favorable terms after trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Disaster Recovery Contract. On behalf of a \u003cstrong\u003edisaster recovery and business continuity company\u003c/strong\u003e, brought suit in a federal court action alleging breach of disaster recovery agreement. Case settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFraud/Breach of Contract/Breach of Fiduciary Duty. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 semiconductor and digital signal processing company\u003c/strong\u003e in a lawsuit by a former employee and purchaser of the client\u0026rsquo;s business in which the purchaser claimed that the client misrepresented facts and breached an acquisition agreement in connection with the sale of the business. Settled the lawsuit for a fraction of the damages claimed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBreach of Computer Automation Contract. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading global semiconductor company\u003c/strong\u003e in a state court suit against allegations of breach of computer automation services contract. Settled the lawsuit on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEmployment and Collective Action Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eReverse Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003ecollege\u003c/strong\u003e against claims alleging reverse race discrimination under Title VII and breach of contract arising from termination of a professor. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHarassment/Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eglobal communications company\u003c/strong\u003e against claims in federal court alleging harassment in the workplace, race discrimination, defamation, and breach of contract arising from termination of employee. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAge Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003eleading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers\u003c/strong\u003e in the consumer goods industry against claims alleging age discrimination. Obtained nuisance-value settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eGender Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003ecounty\u003c/strong\u003e against claims alleging gender discrimination. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePregnancy Discrimination. Successfully defended a \u003cstrong\u003emarketing company\u003c/strong\u003e against claim of pregnancy discrimination arising from termination of employee. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFLSA. Defended a \u003cstrong\u003eglobal insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e against claim alleging violation of and retaliation under Fair Labor Standards Act in connection with wages paid to employee, resulting in a favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFLSA Collective Action. Defended a l\u003cstrong\u003eeading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers \u003c/strong\u003ein consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company\u0026rsquo;s behalf. Case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReported Decisions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP. v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Slip Copy, 2015 WL 3916271 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2015) (obtained trebled damages\u0026nbsp;and judgment of over US$42M for defendants\u0026rsquo; willful infringement)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 13cv3669, 2014 WL 6850966, (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 2014) (obtained summary judgment in favor of Tory Burch on trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoach Inc. v. Sassy Couture\u003c/em\u003e, No. SA-10-CV-601-XR, 2012 WL 162366 (W.D. Tex. Jan 19, 2012) (obtained summary judgment on behalf of Coach Inc. on claims for trademark counterfeiting)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eINEOS Group Ltd. v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP\u003c/em\u003e; 312 S.W.3d 843 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (affirmed temporary injunction obtained on behalf of Chevron Phillips Chemical Company in case alleging breach of contract and theft of trade secrets)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKathi Bowman v. CROSSMARK, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 3:09-CV-16, 2010 WL 2837519 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2010) (obtained denial of conditional certification of class under the Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of CROSSMARK, Inc.)\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Litigation: General Commercial—Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds","detail":"Chambers USA, 2023–2025"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Key Lawyer” for Intellectual Property: Trade Secrets, Litigation and Non-Contentious Matters","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2024–2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Intellectual Property Litigation and Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Trademark Law","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized as a “Texas Litigation Star” for General Commercial Litigation and for Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Listed in “Top 250 Women in Litigation” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Complex Commercial Litigation, IP, and Class Actions","detail":"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2024–2026 "},{"title":"Recognized for Plaintiff","detail":"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2026"},{"title":"Named a “Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Dallas, Texas” ","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017–2024"},{"title":"“Best Lawyer in Dallas” for Business Litigation","detail":"D Magazine, 2014–2022"},{"title":"“Top Women Attorneys in Texas” ","detail":"Texas Monthly, January 2020"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13341}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-03T16:04:57.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T16:04:57.000Z","searchable_text":"Arbaugh{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation: General Commercial—Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2023–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a “Key Lawyer” for Intellectual Property: Trade Secrets, Litigation and Non-Contentious Matters\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US, 2024–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Intellectual Property Litigation and Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Trademark Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a “Texas Litigation Star” for General Commercial Litigation and for Intellectual Property\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2018–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Listed in “Top 250 Women in Litigation” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Complex Commercial Litigation, IP, and Class Actions\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2024–2026 \"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Plaintiff\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a “Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Dallas, Texas” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2017–2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Best Lawyer in Dallas” for Business Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D Magazine, 2014–2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Top Women Attorneys in Texas” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Monthly, January 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}Trade Secret, Departing Employee and Trademark Litigation{{ FIELD }}Trademark/Copyright/Counterfeiting. Serves as lead counsel in trademark and copyright infringement matters for international luxury fashion brand owners, including as part of their national anti-counterfeiting campaigns. Regularly manages litigations throughout Texas and the nation and consistently resolves cases on favorable terms—through settlement, motion for summary judgment, or otherwise. She has led more than 100 matters through resolution.{{ FIELD }}Trade Secrets. Regularly counsels clients in broad range of noncompete, non-solicitation, and departing employee issues.{{ FIELD }}Trade Secret/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a software solutions company, obtained an injunction prohibiting a competitor from using or disclosing client’s trade secret solutions in implementing solutions, tools, and technologies for the competitor’s customers.{{ FIELD }}Trade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a global petrochemical company, obtained temporary injunction against world’s third-largest chemical company in state court, alleging trade secret theft and breach of contract arising from defendant’s licensing of polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries. Case settled on very favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Trade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract/Inevitable Disclosure. On behalf of a leading bank consulting and software services company, brought suit against former senior principals and a competitor alleging theft of trade secrets and breach of fiduciary duty after an employee resigned under suspicious circumstances. Obtained a temporary restraining order against the former employee on theory of inevitable disclosure. Subsequently developed proof, through computer forensic evidence, of the employee’s transfer and use of thousands of client’s files, resulting in a temporary injunction which, among other things, prohibited former employee from using and disclosing the client’s trade secrets and other confidential information, from soliciting client’s customers and employees, and from working in competition with client in revenue enhancement. Settled the lawsuit on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Trade Dress Infringement. Represented a cooler and drink ware manufacturer in series of litigations brought against it by competitor company.{{ FIELD }}Trademark Infringement. Successfully defended the yellow pages and a marketing company against a suit by a national competitor alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. Settled lawsuit on very favorable terms for nuisance value after presenting legal flaws to plaintiff.{{ FIELD }}Qui Tam Litigation{{ FIELD }}Texas Medicaid Fraud/Conspiracy to Breach Fiduciary Duty. Represented a whistleblower in co-prosecuting Medicaid fraud case with the State of Texas against one of the world’s largest consumer health and pharmaceutical companies. Case settled for $158 million, the largest Medicaid recovery in the history of the State of Texas.{{ FIELD }}False Claims Act. Defended a publicly traded human services provider in a federal court FCA case in which the State of Texas sought $4 in damages. Lawsuit settled for a fraction of the claimed damages.{{ FIELD }}Class Action and Collective Action Litigation{{ FIELD }}Representing an edible bouquet client in defense of purported class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.{{ FIELD }}Represented a hotel chain in defense of allegations of violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act and threat of class actions by several plaintiffs.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading watch manufacturer in the defense of class action claims of false advertising, deceptive practices, and related claims arising out of “Made in America” claims.{{ FIELD }}Defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company’s behalf. Case settled on very favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Other Commercial Litigation{{ FIELD }}Regularly advises clients in all aspects of contract disputes, from negotiation of contracts to pre-suit disputes to litigation.{{ FIELD }}Breach of Commissions Contract. Obtained a favorable jury verdict as second-chair trial counsel on behalf of a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry. A former employee alleged breach of commissions agreement against the client, which the jury denied. Case settled on very favorable terms after trial.{{ FIELD }}Breach of Disaster Recovery Contract. On behalf of a disaster recovery and business continuity company, brought suit in a federal court action alleging breach of disaster recovery agreement. Case settled on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Fraud/Breach of Contract/Breach of Fiduciary Duty. Successfully defended a Fortune 100 semiconductor and digital signal processing company in a lawsuit by a former employee and purchaser of the client’s business in which the purchaser claimed that the client misrepresented facts and breached an acquisition agreement in connection with the sale of the business. Settled the lawsuit for a fraction of the damages claimed.{{ FIELD }}Breach of Computer Automation Contract. Defended a leading global semiconductor company in a state court suit against allegations of breach of computer automation services contract. Settled the lawsuit on very favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Employment and Collective Action Litigation{{ FIELD }}Reverse Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a college against claims alleging reverse race discrimination under Title VII and breach of contract arising from termination of a professor. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.{{ FIELD }}Harassment/Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a global communications company against claims in federal court alleging harassment in the workplace, race discrimination, defamation, and breach of contract arising from termination of employee. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client.{{ FIELD }}Age Discrimination. Successfully defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry against claims alleging age discrimination. Obtained nuisance-value settlement.{{ FIELD }}Gender Discrimination. Successfully defended a county against claims alleging gender discrimination. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.{{ FIELD }}Pregnancy Discrimination. Successfully defended a marketing company against claim of pregnancy discrimination arising from termination of employee. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client.{{ FIELD }}FLSA. Defended a global insurance company against claim alleging violation of and retaliation under Fair Labor Standards Act in connection with wages paid to employee, resulting in a favorable settlement.{{ FIELD }}FLSA Collective Action. Defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company’s behalf. Case settled.{{ FIELD }}Reported Decisions{{ FIELD }}Tory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP. v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc. Slip Copy, 2015 WL 3916271 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2015) (obtained trebled damages and judgment of over US$42M for defendants’ willful infringement){{ FIELD }}Tory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc., et al., No. 13cv3669, 2014 WL 6850966, (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 2014) (obtained summary judgment in favor of Tory Burch on trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims){{ FIELD }}Coach Inc. v. Sassy Couture, No. SA-10-CV-601-XR, 2012 WL 162366 (W.D. Tex. Jan 19, 2012) (obtained summary judgment on behalf of Coach Inc. on claims for trademark counterfeiting){{ FIELD }}INEOS Group Ltd. v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP; 312 S.W.3d 843 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (affirmed temporary injunction obtained on behalf of Chevron Phillips Chemical Company in case alleging breach of contract and theft of trade secrets){{ FIELD }}Kathi Bowman v. CROSSMARK, Inc., No. 3:09-CV-16, 2010 WL 2837519 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2010) (obtained denial of conditional certification of class under the Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of CROSSMARK, Inc.){{ FIELD }}Natalie Arbaugh is a trial lawyer with a passion for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence. Her extensive experience has led her to be recognized multiple times as one of Benchmark Litigation’s “Top 250 Women in Litigation,” ranked by Chambers USA, listed in The Best Lawyers in America®, selected to the Texas Super Lawyers list, and named “Winning Woman” by Texas Lawyer. \nNatalie represents plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of industries in state and federal courts throughout the country in complex—and often high-profile—business and intellectual property disputes. From handling breach of contract matters to trade secret litigation to class actions, she is skilled at distilling even the most complex of business disputes into a simple story that resonates with judges and juries alike. Her intellectual property practice focuses on trade secret and departing employee issues, including noncompete counseling and litigation, and trademark litigation. \nNatalie’s trial experience includes an eight-year case in which she co-counseled with the Texas Attorney General’s office to try one of the largest and most complex fraud cases in Texas history. Resulting in the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas, this record-breaking case led to her prior law firm being named a “Litigation Department of the Year” finalist and contributed to Natalie being named a “Winning Woman” by Texas Lawyer. She also was a key member of the trial team for the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC against billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban. Following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court, the jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing.\nIn an IP case covered by Law360, Natalie obtained sanctions against her opponent after methodically building a case to show that the defendants falsified and modified evidence and committed perjury and fraud in an attempt to undermine her client’s trademark infringement claims and assert superior trademark rights. She decisively persuaded the court otherwise, and following a bench trial, obtained a $42 million judgment for her client. In awarding her client its attorneys’ fees, the trial court judge stated, “Counsel’s skill and expertise has been evident throughout this litigation, and their performance under taxing circumstances has been impressive.”\nThe most fulfilling aspect of Natalie’s career is the strong relationships she builds with her clients. They rely on her as a trusted legal advisor—someone collaborative, innovative, and deeply invested in guiding them toward the best possible outcome, whether that means winning at trial, resolving a dispute early, or finding a creative business solution. Natalie understands that her clients need thoughtful, strategic counsel to navigate their most pressing challenges, and she treats their priorities as her own. She works closely with them to evaluate risks, make informed decisions, and resolve complex issues long before a case ever reaches the courtroom.  Partner Litigation: General Commercial—Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds Chambers USA, 2023–2025 Recognized as a “Key Lawyer” for Intellectual Property: Trade Secrets, Litigation and Non-Contentious Matters The Legal 500 US, 2024–2025 Recognized for Intellectual Property Litigation and Commercial Litigation The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026 Recognized for Trademark Law The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026 Recognized as a “Texas Litigation Star” for General Commercial Litigation and for Intellectual Property Benchmark Litigation US, 2018–2026 Listed in “Top 250 Women in Litigation”  Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2026 Recognized for Complex Commercial Litigation, IP, and Class Actions Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2024–2026  Recognized for Plaintiff Lawdragon “500 Leading Litigators in America”, 2026 Named a “Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Dallas, Texas”  Super Lawyers, 2017–2024 “Best Lawyer in Dallas” for Business Litigation D Magazine, 2014–2022 “Top Women Attorneys in Texas”  Texas Monthly, January 2020 Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Texas Member of Trade Secrets Committee, AIPLA, 2015–present Member of Board of Directors, Texas General Counsel Forum, DFW Chapter, 2011–Present Dallas Association of Young Lawyers Lifetime Fellow Law Clerk, Honorable Justice Deborah Hankinson, Texas Supreme Court Trade Secret, Departing Employee and Trademark Litigation Trademark/Copyright/Counterfeiting. Serves as lead counsel in trademark and copyright infringement matters for international luxury fashion brand owners, including as part of their national anti-counterfeiting campaigns. Regularly manages litigations throughout Texas and the nation and consistently resolves cases on favorable terms—through settlement, motion for summary judgment, or otherwise. She has led more than 100 matters through resolution. Trade Secrets. Regularly counsels clients in broad range of noncompete, non-solicitation, and departing employee issues. Trade Secret/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a software solutions company, obtained an injunction prohibiting a competitor from using or disclosing client’s trade secret solutions in implementing solutions, tools, and technologies for the competitor’s customers. Trade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract. On behalf of a global petrochemical company, obtained temporary injunction against world’s third-largest chemical company in state court, alleging trade secret theft and breach of contract arising from defendant’s licensing of polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries. Case settled on very favorable terms. Trade Secret Misappropriation/Breach of Contract/Inevitable Disclosure. On behalf of a leading bank consulting and software services company, brought suit against former senior principals and a competitor alleging theft of trade secrets and breach of fiduciary duty after an employee resigned under suspicious circumstances. Obtained a temporary restraining order against the former employee on theory of inevitable disclosure. Subsequently developed proof, through computer forensic evidence, of the employee’s transfer and use of thousands of client’s files, resulting in a temporary injunction which, among other things, prohibited former employee from using and disclosing the client’s trade secrets and other confidential information, from soliciting client’s customers and employees, and from working in competition with client in revenue enhancement. Settled the lawsuit on favorable terms. Trade Dress Infringement. Represented a cooler and drink ware manufacturer in series of litigations brought against it by competitor company. Trademark Infringement. Successfully defended the yellow pages and a marketing company against a suit by a national competitor alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. Settled lawsuit on very favorable terms for nuisance value after presenting legal flaws to plaintiff. Qui Tam Litigation Texas Medicaid Fraud/Conspiracy to Breach Fiduciary Duty. Represented a whistleblower in co-prosecuting Medicaid fraud case with the State of Texas against one of the world’s largest consumer health and pharmaceutical companies. Case settled for $158 million, the largest Medicaid recovery in the history of the State of Texas. False Claims Act. Defended a publicly traded human services provider in a federal court FCA case in which the State of Texas sought $4 in damages. Lawsuit settled for a fraction of the claimed damages. Class Action and Collective Action Litigation Representing an edible bouquet client in defense of purported class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Represented a hotel chain in defense of allegations of violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act and threat of class actions by several plaintiffs. Represented a leading watch manufacturer in the defense of class action claims of false advertising, deceptive practices, and related claims arising out of “Made in America” claims. Defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company’s behalf. Case settled on very favorable terms. Other Commercial Litigation Regularly advises clients in all aspects of contract disputes, from negotiation of contracts to pre-suit disputes to litigation. Breach of Commissions Contract. Obtained a favorable jury verdict as second-chair trial counsel on behalf of a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry. A former employee alleged breach of commissions agreement against the client, which the jury denied. Case settled on very favorable terms after trial. Breach of Disaster Recovery Contract. On behalf of a disaster recovery and business continuity company, brought suit in a federal court action alleging breach of disaster recovery agreement. Case settled on favorable terms. Fraud/Breach of Contract/Breach of Fiduciary Duty. Successfully defended a Fortune 100 semiconductor and digital signal processing company in a lawsuit by a former employee and purchaser of the client’s business in which the purchaser claimed that the client misrepresented facts and breached an acquisition agreement in connection with the sale of the business. Settled the lawsuit for a fraction of the damages claimed. Breach of Computer Automation Contract. Defended a leading global semiconductor company in a state court suit against allegations of breach of computer automation services contract. Settled the lawsuit on very favorable terms. Employment and Collective Action Litigation Reverse Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a college against claims alleging reverse race discrimination under Title VII and breach of contract arising from termination of a professor. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client. Harassment/Race Discrimination. Successfully defended a global communications company against claims in federal court alleging harassment in the workplace, race discrimination, defamation, and breach of contract arising from termination of employee. Obtained total summary judgment on behalf of client. Age Discrimination. Successfully defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in the consumer goods industry against claims alleging age discrimination. Obtained nuisance-value settlement. Gender Discrimination. Successfully defended a county against claims alleging gender discrimination. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client. Pregnancy Discrimination. Successfully defended a marketing company against claim of pregnancy discrimination arising from termination of employee. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of client. FLSA. Defended a global insurance company against claim alleging violation of and retaliation under Fair Labor Standards Act in connection with wages paid to employee, resulting in a favorable settlement. FLSA Collective Action. Defended a leading provider of business services for manufacturers and retailers in consumer goods industry in purported collective action claims of alleged unpaid overtime. Obtained complete denial of collective action on company’s behalf. Case settled. Reported Decisions Tory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP. v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc. Slip Copy, 2015 WL 3916271 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2015) (obtained trebled damages and judgment of over US$42M for defendants’ willful infringement) Tory Burch LLC and River Light V, LP v. Lin \u0026amp; J International, Inc., et al., No. 13cv3669, 2014 WL 6850966, (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 2014) (obtained summary judgment in favor of Tory Burch on trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims) Coach Inc. v. Sassy Couture, No. SA-10-CV-601-XR, 2012 WL 162366 (W.D. Tex. Jan 19, 2012) (obtained summary judgment on behalf of Coach Inc. on claims for trademark counterfeiting) INEOS Group Ltd. v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP; 312 S.W.3d 843 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (affirmed temporary injunction obtained on behalf of Chevron Phillips Chemical Company in case alleging breach of contract and theft of trade secrets) Kathi Bowman v. CROSSMARK, Inc., No. 3:09-CV-16, 2010 WL 2837519 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2010) (obtained denial of conditional certification of class under the Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of CROSSMARK, Inc.)","searchable_name":"Natalie L. Arbaugh","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":176,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":442768,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5372,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMel Bailey focuses his practice on high profile product liability, business litigation and personal injury cases for more than 30 years. He has achieved success at trial attorney in some of the most challenging venues in the United States, including Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, Georgia, Maryland, Nevada and Florida. His extensive courtroom experience has resulted in representation of leading corporate clients in complex and high stake litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMel has tried more than 65 cases to verdict in his career and has served as lead trial counsel on behalf of numerous Fortune 100 Companies in both product liability and toxic tort litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"melvin-bailey","email":"mbailey@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Bailey","nick_name":"Mel","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Melvin","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[{"id":1896,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"1987-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"D.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Super Lawyer","detail":"Superlawyer’s Magazine (2003-2018)"},{"title":"Texas Lawyer","detail":"Superlawyer’s Edition (2006-2018)"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in Dallas","detail":"Dallas D Magazine"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2017-2018"},{"title":"International Association of Defense Counsel Trial Academy","detail":"2017"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/mel-bailey-10aa2033/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMel Bailey focuses his practice on high profile product liability, business litigation and personal injury cases for more than 30 years. He has achieved success at trial attorney in some of the most challenging venues in the United States, including Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, Georgia, Maryland, Nevada and Florida. His extensive courtroom experience has resulted in representation of leading corporate clients in complex and high stake litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMel has tried more than 65 cases to verdict in his career and has served as lead trial counsel on behalf of numerous Fortune 100 Companies in both product liability and toxic tort litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Super Lawyer","detail":"Superlawyer’s Magazine (2003-2018)"},{"title":"Texas Lawyer","detail":"Superlawyer’s Edition (2006-2018)"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in Dallas","detail":"Dallas D Magazine"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2017-2018"},{"title":"International Association of Defense Counsel Trial Academy","detail":"2017"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6358}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:46.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:46.000Z","searchable_text":"Bailey{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Superlawyer’s Magazine (2003-2018)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Superlawyer’s Edition (2006-2018)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in Dallas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Dallas D Magazine\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2017-2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"International Association of Defense Counsel Trial Academy\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2017\"}{{ FIELD }}Mel Bailey focuses his practice on high profile product liability, business litigation and personal injury cases for more than 30 years. He has achieved success at trial attorney in some of the most challenging venues in the United States, including Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, Georgia, Maryland, Nevada and Florida. His extensive courtroom experience has resulted in representation of leading corporate clients in complex and high stake litigation.\nMel has tried more than 65 cases to verdict in his career and has served as lead trial counsel on behalf of numerous Fortune 100 Companies in both product liability and toxic tort litigation. Partner Super Lawyer Superlawyer’s Magazine (2003-2018) Texas Lawyer Superlawyer’s Edition (2006-2018) Best Lawyers in Dallas Dallas D Magazine Best Lawyers in America 2017-2018 International Association of Defense Counsel Trial Academy 2017 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Texas Fellow, American College of Trial Lawyers Member, International Association of Defense Counsel Fellow, Litigation of Trial Counsel Member, The Trial Lawyer Honorary Society Former Member, American Board Trial Advocates Member, Diversity Law Institute Member, Trial Law Institute Inactive  Member, American Board of Trial Advocates IADC Trial Academy Faculty, Stanford University","searchable_name":"Melvin D. Bailey (Mel)","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":445617,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7308,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMichael Bittner is an intellectual property trial lawyer, with an emphasis on patent litigation. He is recognized for being \u0026ldquo;superb at working up cases and delivering them in the right key for district court, Federal Circuit, and PTAB judges\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003e(IAM Patent 1000\u003c/em\u003e, 2020). Michael has extensive experience across a wide array of technologies and has also been recognized for his patent litigation work by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e The Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael is experienced in all aspects of patent litigation (plaintiffs and defendants), including performing pre-filing investigations, handling complex discovery, preparing for and presenting at \u003cem\u003eMarkman\u003c/em\u003e hearings, working with fact and expert witnesses, preparing and presenting the case for dispositive motions and trial, and through appeal. He represents clients in a wide variety of technologies, including telecommunications, networking, financial services, and data management. Michael also focuses on cases adjudicating whether royalties for standard essential patent portfolios comply with FRAND/RAND obligations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael has been recognized in the area of Intellectual Property: Texas in \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (2022\u0026ndash;2025) and as a \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;Up and Coming Practitioner\u0026rdquo; (2019, 2021). He is listed as a \u0026ldquo;Key Lawyer\u0026rdquo; in \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e in the area of Patents: Litigation (2021, 2025), recognized in the \u003cem\u003eIAM Patent 1000\u003c/em\u003e (2019\u0026ndash;2025), named to \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation US\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;40 \u0026amp; Under List\u0026rdquo; in Intellectual Property (2017\u0026ndash;2020), and named as a \u0026ldquo;Rising Star\u0026rdquo; in Intellectual Property Litigation for \u003cem\u003eTexas Super Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e (2015\u0026ndash;2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael also has extensive experience representing clients in other intellectual property disputes, including trademark, trade dress, and trade secret litigation. He has represented both Fortune 500 and small-to-medium sized business in disputes ranging from fixed fee brand enforcement actions and multimillion-dollar \u0026ldquo;bet the business\u0026rdquo; cases.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"michael-bittner","email":"mbittner@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC\u003c/em\u003e (N.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented the plaintiff in patent non-infringement and invalidity declaratory judgment actions, and related appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCaptivate LLC v. Waitt Consulting LLC, et al.\u003c/em\u003e (D. Neb.) \u0026ndash; Represented Captivate in a patent infringement suit against Waitt Consulting.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEricsson, et al. v. LG, et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented Ericsson in a FRAND patent suit against LG related to licensing LG\u0026rsquo;s patent portfolio of 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE wireless technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e (E.D.Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented defendants in a trade secret and patent litigation matter. Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud following a month-long trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eYETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (W.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented defendants in case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement. Case resolved on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eeDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex) \u0026ndash; Represented multiple defendants in patent infringement case involving data management and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under \u003cem\u003eAlice\u003c/em\u003e and an award of attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees based on an exceptional case finding.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eClear with Computers v. Altec Indus., Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex) \u0026ndash; Represented defendant in patent infringement case involving internet advertising and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under \u003cem\u003eAlice\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGeoTag, Inc. v. Numerous Defendants\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented over thirty defendants in patent infringement suits relating to website store location technology. Lead counsel for largest joint defense effort in the history of the Eastern District of Texas (more than 400 defendants). Case resolved on favorable terms.\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":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1203,"guid":"1203.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Bittner","nick_name":"Michael","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Honorable David J. Folsom, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2008 - 2009"}],"first_name":"Michael","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2055,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"with honors","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2008-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Litigation – Intellectual Property","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2024–2026"},{"title":"Litigation – Patent","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Recognized for IP \u0026 Patent Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2022–2026"},{"title":"“40 \u0026 Under List” in Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2020"},{"title":"Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2021–2025"},{"title":"“Up and Coming Practitioner” for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2019–2021"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” for Patents: Litigation","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2021, 2025"},{"title":"Michael “can be looked to in complex litigations across all manner of technologies, highly regarded for his perceptive insights and meticulous approach”","detail":"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025"},{"title":"Michael “plays the role of strategist, case manager and advocate to perfection”","detail":"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025 "},{"title":"“Rising Star” for Intellectual Property Litigation, Texas","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015–2018"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-bittner-2a796295/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMichael Bittner is an intellectual property trial lawyer, with an emphasis on patent litigation. He is recognized for being \u0026ldquo;superb at working up cases and delivering them in the right key for district court, Federal Circuit, and PTAB judges\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003e(IAM Patent 1000\u003c/em\u003e, 2020). Michael has extensive experience across a wide array of technologies and has also been recognized for his patent litigation work by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e The Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael is experienced in all aspects of patent litigation (plaintiffs and defendants), including performing pre-filing investigations, handling complex discovery, preparing for and presenting at \u003cem\u003eMarkman\u003c/em\u003e hearings, working with fact and expert witnesses, preparing and presenting the case for dispositive motions and trial, and through appeal. He represents clients in a wide variety of technologies, including telecommunications, networking, financial services, and data management. Michael also focuses on cases adjudicating whether royalties for standard essential patent portfolios comply with FRAND/RAND obligations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael has been recognized in the area of Intellectual Property: Texas in \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (2022\u0026ndash;2025) and as a \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;Up and Coming Practitioner\u0026rdquo; (2019, 2021). He is listed as a \u0026ldquo;Key Lawyer\u0026rdquo; in \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e in the area of Patents: Litigation (2021, 2025), recognized in the \u003cem\u003eIAM Patent 1000\u003c/em\u003e (2019\u0026ndash;2025), named to \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation US\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;40 \u0026amp; Under List\u0026rdquo; in Intellectual Property (2017\u0026ndash;2020), and named as a \u0026ldquo;Rising Star\u0026rdquo; in Intellectual Property Litigation for \u003cem\u003eTexas Super Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e (2015\u0026ndash;2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMichael also has extensive experience representing clients in other intellectual property disputes, including trademark, trade dress, and trade secret litigation. He has represented both Fortune 500 and small-to-medium sized business in disputes ranging from fixed fee brand enforcement actions and multimillion-dollar \u0026ldquo;bet the business\u0026rdquo; cases.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC\u003c/em\u003e (N.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented the plaintiff in patent non-infringement and invalidity declaratory judgment actions, and related appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCaptivate LLC v. Waitt Consulting LLC, et al.\u003c/em\u003e (D. Neb.) \u0026ndash; Represented Captivate in a patent infringement suit against Waitt Consulting.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEricsson, et al. v. LG, et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented Ericsson in a FRAND patent suit against LG related to licensing LG\u0026rsquo;s patent portfolio of 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE wireless technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e (E.D.Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented defendants in a trade secret and patent litigation matter. Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud following a month-long trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eYETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (W.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented defendants in case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement. Case resolved on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eeDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex) \u0026ndash; Represented multiple defendants in patent infringement case involving data management and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under \u003cem\u003eAlice\u003c/em\u003e and an award of attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees based on an exceptional case finding.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eClear with Computers v. Altec Indus., Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex) \u0026ndash; Represented defendant in patent infringement case involving internet advertising and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under \u003cem\u003eAlice\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGeoTag, Inc. v. Numerous Defendants\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented over thirty defendants in patent infringement suits relating to website store location technology. Lead counsel for largest joint defense effort in the history of the Eastern District of Texas (more than 400 defendants). Case resolved on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Litigation – Intellectual Property","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2024–2026"},{"title":"Litigation – Patent","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Recognized for IP \u0026 Patent Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2022–2026"},{"title":"“40 \u0026 Under List” in Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2020"},{"title":"Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2021–2025"},{"title":"“Up and Coming Practitioner” for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2019–2021"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” for Patents: Litigation","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2021, 2025"},{"title":"Michael “can be looked to in complex litigations across all manner of technologies, highly regarded for his perceptive insights and meticulous approach”","detail":"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025"},{"title":"Michael “plays the role of strategist, case manager and advocate to perfection”","detail":"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025 "},{"title":"“Rising Star” for Intellectual Property Litigation, Texas","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015–2018"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13352}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-05T19:50:22.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-05T19:50:22.000Z","searchable_text":"Bittner{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation – Intellectual Property\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2024–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation – Patent\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Recognized for IP \u0026amp; Patent Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2022–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Future Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2022–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“40 \u0026amp; Under List” in Intellectual Property\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2021–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Up and Coming Practitioner” for Intellectual Property – Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2019–2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Key Lawyer” for Patents: Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US, 2021, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Michael “can be looked to in complex litigations across all manner of technologies, highly regarded for his perceptive insights and meticulous approach”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Michael “plays the role of strategist, case manager and advocate to perfection”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025 \"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Rising Star” for Intellectual Property Litigation, Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2015–2018\"}{{ FIELD }}SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC (N.D. Tex.) – Represented the plaintiff in patent non-infringement and invalidity declaratory judgment actions, and related appeal.{{ FIELD }}Captivate LLC v. Waitt Consulting LLC, et al. (D. Neb.) – Represented Captivate in a patent infringement suit against Waitt Consulting.{{ FIELD }}Ericsson, et al. v. LG, et al. (E.D. Tex.) – Represented Ericsson in a FRAND patent suit against LG related to licensing LG’s patent portfolio of 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE wireless technology.{{ FIELD }}Tech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al (E.D.Tex.) – Represented defendants in a trade secret and patent litigation matter. Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud following a month-long trial.{{ FIELD }}YETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al. (W.D. Tex.) – Represented defendants in case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement. Case resolved on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}eDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex) – Represented multiple defendants in patent infringement case involving data management and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under Alice and an award of attorneys’ fees based on an exceptional case finding.{{ FIELD }}Clear with Computers v. Altec Indus., Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex) – Represented defendant in patent infringement case involving internet advertising and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under Alice.{{ FIELD }}GeoTag, Inc. v. Numerous Defendants (E.D. Tex.) – Represented over thirty defendants in patent infringement suits relating to website store location technology. Lead counsel for largest joint defense effort in the history of the Eastern District of Texas (more than 400 defendants). Case resolved on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Michael Bittner is an intellectual property trial lawyer, with an emphasis on patent litigation. He is recognized for being “superb at working up cases and delivering them in the right key for district court, Federal Circuit, and PTAB judges” (IAM Patent 1000, 2020). Michael has extensive experience across a wide array of technologies and has also been recognized for his patent litigation work by Chambers USA and The Legal 500 US.\nMichael is experienced in all aspects of patent litigation (plaintiffs and defendants), including performing pre-filing investigations, handling complex discovery, preparing for and presenting at Markman hearings, working with fact and expert witnesses, preparing and presenting the case for dispositive motions and trial, and through appeal. He represents clients in a wide variety of technologies, including telecommunications, networking, financial services, and data management. Michael also focuses on cases adjudicating whether royalties for standard essential patent portfolios comply with FRAND/RAND obligations.\nMichael has been recognized in the area of Intellectual Property: Texas in Chambers USA (2022–2025) and as a Chambers USA “Up and Coming Practitioner” (2019, 2021). He is listed as a “Key Lawyer” in The Legal 500 US in the area of Patents: Litigation (2021, 2025), recognized in the IAM Patent 1000 (2019–2025), named to Benchmark Litigation US’s “40 \u0026amp; Under List” in Intellectual Property (2017–2020), and named as a “Rising Star” in Intellectual Property Litigation for Texas Super Lawyers (2015–2020).\nMichael also has extensive experience representing clients in other intellectual property disputes, including trademark, trade dress, and trade secret litigation. He has represented both Fortune 500 and small-to-medium sized business in disputes ranging from fixed fee brand enforcement actions and multimillion-dollar “bet the business” cases. Partner Litigation – Intellectual Property The Best Lawyers in America®, 2024–2026 Litigation – Patent The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026 “500 Leading Litigators in America – Recognized for IP \u0026amp; Patent Litigation Lawdragon, 2022–2026 “Future Star” Benchmark Litigation US, 2022–2026 “40 \u0026amp; Under List” in Intellectual Property Benchmark Litigation US, 2017–2020 Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas Chambers USA, 2021–2025 “Up and Coming Practitioner” for Intellectual Property – Texas Chambers USA, 2019–2021 “Key Lawyer” for Patents: Litigation The Legal 500 US, 2021, 2025 Michael “can be looked to in complex litigations across all manner of technologies, highly regarded for his perceptive insights and meticulous approach” IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025 Michael “plays the role of strategist, case manager and advocate to perfection” IAM Patent 1000, 2019–2025  “Rising Star” for Intellectual Property Litigation, Texas Super Lawyers, 2015–2018 University of Texas  The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law Texas Law Clerk, Honorable David J. Folsom, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC (N.D. Tex.) – Represented the plaintiff in patent non-infringement and invalidity declaratory judgment actions, and related appeal. Captivate LLC v. Waitt Consulting LLC, et al. (D. Neb.) – Represented Captivate in a patent infringement suit against Waitt Consulting. Ericsson, et al. v. LG, et al. (E.D. Tex.) – Represented Ericsson in a FRAND patent suit against LG related to licensing LG’s patent portfolio of 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE wireless technology. Tech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al (E.D.Tex.) – Represented defendants in a trade secret and patent litigation matter. Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud following a month-long trial. YETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al. (W.D. Tex.) – Represented defendants in case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement. Case resolved on favorable terms. eDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex) – Represented multiple defendants in patent infringement case involving data management and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under Alice and an award of attorneys’ fees based on an exceptional case finding. Clear with Computers v. Altec Indus., Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex) – Represented defendant in patent infringement case involving internet advertising and related appeal. Obtained judgment of invalidity on motion to dismiss under Alice. GeoTag, Inc. v. Numerous Defendants (E.D. Tex.) – Represented over thirty defendants in patent infringement suits relating to website store location technology. Lead counsel for largest joint defense effort in the history of the Eastern District of Texas (more than 400 defendants). Case resolved on favorable terms.","searchable_name":"Michael A. Bittner","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":445859,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7310,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eIP litigation\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003espanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ahtoosa-dale","email":"adale@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\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":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Dale","nick_name":"Ahtoosa","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2016 - 2017"}],"first_name":"Ahtoosa","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":181,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2016-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property – Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"40 \u0026 Under","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2026"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Under 40”","detail":"D Magazine, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the Top 250","detail":"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eIP litigation\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003espanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property – Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"40 \u0026 Under","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2026"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Under 40”","detail":"D Magazine, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the Top 250","detail":"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13342}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-16T15:51:41.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-16T15:51:41.000Z","searchable_text":"Dale{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Property Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Patent Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Property – Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"40 \u0026amp; Under\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Best Lawyers Under 40”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D Magazine, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized within the Top 250\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\nTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.{{ FIELD }}Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial.{{ FIELD }}Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.{{ FIELD }}Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.{{ FIELD }}Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation and Other Matters\nUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney’s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.{{ FIELD }}Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.{{ FIELD }}Ahtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on IP litigation spanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries. \nAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability. \nAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\nPrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML. Partner Intellectual Property Law Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 Patent Litigation Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 Intellectual Property – Litigation Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 40 \u0026amp; Under Benchmark Litigation, 2026 “Best Lawyers Under 40” D Magazine, 2025 Recognized within the Top 250 Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025 Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Baylor University Baylor University School of Law Texas Member, Dallas Bar Association Programming Co-Chair, ChIPs USPTO Chapter Member, Honorable Barbara M. G. Lynn American Inn of Court, 2022-2024 Member, Texas Association Against Sexual Assault Judicial Clerk, Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\nTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement. Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial. Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled. Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva. Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution. Commercial Litigation and Other Matters\nUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney’s fees to Unbnd for the appeal. Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.","searchable_name":"Ahtoosa A. Dale","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446917,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6695,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eChris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e (included in \u0026ldquo;The 500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo;), \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\";\u0026nbsp;and \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e, where\u0026nbsp;commentators have called him \u0026ldquo;a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who\u0026nbsp;\"excels at witness examination and argument.\"\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"christopher-duffy","email":"cduffy@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAmicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank\u0026rsquo;s equity trading platform\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm\u0026rsquo;s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico\u0026rsquo;s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm\u0026rsquo;s portfolio companies\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Duffy","nick_name":"Chris","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Christopher","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":485,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2001-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"E.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\" ","detail":"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025"},{"title":"Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\" ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025"},{"title":"Recognized for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026 Competition Lawyers in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026 White-Collar Criminal Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023"},{"title":"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list ","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eChris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e (included in \u0026ldquo;The 500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo;), \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\";\u0026nbsp;and \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e, where\u0026nbsp;commentators have called him \u0026ldquo;a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who\u0026nbsp;\"excels at witness examination and argument.\"\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAmicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank\u0026rsquo;s equity trading platform\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm\u0026rsquo;s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico\u0026rsquo;s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm\u0026rsquo;s portfolio companies\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\" ","detail":"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025"},{"title":"Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\" ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025"},{"title":"Recognized for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026 Competition Lawyers in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026 White-Collar Criminal Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023"},{"title":"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list ","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11711}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-20T20:43:37.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-20T20:43:37.000Z","searchable_text":"Duffy{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2022–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Described as an \\\"outstanding civil litigator,\\\" a \\\"great courtroom presence,\\\" and \\\"a great writer and trial lawyer\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Described as a \\\"stand-out\\\" with \\\"a first-class legal mind\\\" who \\\"excels at witness examination and argument\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2023-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026amp; Competition Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026amp; White-Collar Criminal Defense \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America{{ FIELD }}Co-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff’s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit{{ FIELD }}Amicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects{{ FIELD }}Counsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank’s equity trading platform{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor{{ FIELD }}Counsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm’s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico’s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies{{ FIELD }}Won a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal{{ FIELD }}Won a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm’s portfolio companies{{ FIELD }}Chris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.\nChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as Lawdragon (included in “The 500 Leading Lawyers in America”), Chambers USA (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\"; and The Legal 500, where commentators have called him “a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who \"excels at witness examination and argument.\" Partner Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America  Lawdragon, 2022–2026 Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\"  Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025 Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\"  Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025 Recognized for International Arbitration Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025 Recognized for Financial Services Litigation Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025 Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America Lawdragon, 2023-2025 Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026amp; Competition Lawyers in America Lawdragon, 2026 Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026amp; White-Collar Criminal Defense  Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023 Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list  Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025 University of Virginia  Columbia University Columbia 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 Third 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 Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin New York Texas New York Regional Board of the College Foundation of the University of Virginia Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America Co-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff’s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest Co-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials Lead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit Amicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues Lead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims Lead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company Lead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims Lead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans Co-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group Lead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects Counsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank’s equity trading platform Lead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps Co-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor Counsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm’s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims Lead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico’s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement Lead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies Won a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal Won a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network Won the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm’s portfolio companies","searchable_name":"Christopher E. Duffy (Chris)","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":446379,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7344,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKatrina is a trial lawyer and litigator with a passion for bet-the-business complex commercial, class action, intellectual property, and qui tam disputes. She is known for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKatrina brings extensive experience across a broad spectrum of commercial disputes, including class action defense, fraud, breach of contract, non-compete and non-solicitation, partnership disputes, business torts, unfair competition, patent and trademark infringement, whistleblowing, and securities fraud. This breadth of experience allows her to approach each matter with efficiency, clarity, and strategic precision. Katrina understands that true success extends beyond legal victories\u0026mdash;winning means aligning litigation strategy with her client\u0026rsquo;s overarching business objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKatrina\u0026rsquo;s experience representing direct‑selling organizations is particularly notable. She was recognized by \u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e as a \u0026ldquo;Trailblazer\u0026rdquo; for her work defending direct‑selling companies in high‑stakes, bet‑the‑business disputes. On the litigation front, she has successfully defended dozens of direct‑selling companies in class actions and downline‑raiding cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer work in this space extends well beyond litigation. Katrina is frequently called upon to defend direct‑selling and other companies facing Federal Trade Commission and state regulatory investigations, advise on regulatory compliance, and guide clients through high‑profile publicity crises. In each instance, she helps clients navigate risk decisively while protecting both their legal position and their brand.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"katrina-eash","email":"keash@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of class claims for \u003cstrong\u003emulti-level marketing organization\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company class action after successfully compelling arbitration and enforcement of class-action waiver.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003emultiple multi-level marketing organizations\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company class action litigation involving pyramid scheme allegations under RICO and federal securities laws.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising numerous \u003cstrong\u003emulti-level marketing organizations\u003c/strong\u003e regarding amendments to their governing documents and contracts with independent contractors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 computer company\u003c/strong\u003e against patent infringement claims and obtained dismissal of the claims following numerous dispositive and favorable Markman.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 computer company\u003c/strong\u003e against patent infringement claims and after exposing legal flaws in the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s case, obtained favorable settlement for my client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003erelators\u003c/strong\u003e in qui tam action alleging violations of both federal and state false claims prevention acts related to a clinical laboratory testing conspiracy carried out by Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eloyalty rewards corporation\u003c/strong\u003e from a hostile takeover of its board of directors by obtaining an injunction preventing the expansion of the board of directors. Decision affirmed by the Texas Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003elarge steel fabrication company\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company suit against competitor. Obtained early injunction against competitor restraining the competitor\u0026rsquo;s theft and unlawful use of trade secrets. After litigating for two years, obtained successful settlement for client on eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e in case alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation when portfolio company defaulted on certain debts. Obtained dismissal of all claims against fund totaling more than US$7M.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a \u003cstrong\u003eportfolio of oil and gas companies\u003c/strong\u003e against wrongful termination and breach of contract allegations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003egroup of vascular surgeons\u003c/strong\u003e against wrongful termination claims and obtained dismissal of numerous claims and defendants prior to trial and a take nothing judgment on all remaining claims following trial.\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":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":15,"guid":"15.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Eash","nick_name":"Katrina","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Chad Everingham, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2010 - 2012"}],"first_name":"Katrina","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":1852,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2010-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"G.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Up and Coming Practitioner” - General Commercial Litigation","detail":"Chambers USA, 2024–2025"},{"title":"“500 X – The Next Generation”- Complex Commercial Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2024–2025"},{"title":"“Under 40 Hot List” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2020–2023"},{"title":"“Future Star” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2021–2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2024–2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®: Ones to Watch, 2021–2023"},{"title":"“Women in Business” List","detail":"Dallas Business Journal, 2023"},{"title":"“40 \u0026 Under” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2020–2023"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2026"},{"title":"“Super Lawyers Rising Stars”","detail":"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2018–2019, 2021, and 2023"},{"title":"“Up-and-Coming 50: Women Texas Rising Stars” ","detail":"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2023"},{"title":"“Texas Trailblazer”","detail":"Texas Lawyers, 2019"},{"title":"Named to “20 Under 40” List","detail":"Park Cities People, 2019"},{"title":"Professional Excellence Honors “On the Rise”","detail":"Texas Lawyers, 2019"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"SMU Deadman School of Law"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKatrina is a trial lawyer and litigator with a passion for bet-the-business complex commercial, class action, intellectual property, and qui tam disputes. She is known for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKatrina brings extensive experience across a broad spectrum of commercial disputes, including class action defense, fraud, breach of contract, non-compete and non-solicitation, partnership disputes, business torts, unfair competition, patent and trademark infringement, whistleblowing, and securities fraud. This breadth of experience allows her to approach each matter with efficiency, clarity, and strategic precision. Katrina understands that true success extends beyond legal victories\u0026mdash;winning means aligning litigation strategy with her client\u0026rsquo;s overarching business objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKatrina\u0026rsquo;s experience representing direct‑selling organizations is particularly notable. She was recognized by \u003cem\u003eTexas Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e as a \u0026ldquo;Trailblazer\u0026rdquo; for her work defending direct‑selling companies in high‑stakes, bet‑the‑business disputes. On the litigation front, she has successfully defended dozens of direct‑selling companies in class actions and downline‑raiding cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer work in this space extends well beyond litigation. Katrina is frequently called upon to defend direct‑selling and other companies facing Federal Trade Commission and state regulatory investigations, advise on regulatory compliance, and guide clients through high‑profile publicity crises. In each instance, she helps clients navigate risk decisively while protecting both their legal position and their brand.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of class claims for \u003cstrong\u003emulti-level marketing organization\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company class action after successfully compelling arbitration and enforcement of class-action waiver.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003emultiple multi-level marketing organizations\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company class action litigation involving pyramid scheme allegations under RICO and federal securities laws.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising numerous \u003cstrong\u003emulti-level marketing organizations\u003c/strong\u003e regarding amendments to their governing documents and contracts with independent contractors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 computer company\u003c/strong\u003e against patent infringement claims and obtained dismissal of the claims following numerous dispositive and favorable Markman.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eFortune 100 computer company\u003c/strong\u003e against patent infringement claims and after exposing legal flaws in the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s case, obtained favorable settlement for my client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003erelators\u003c/strong\u003e in qui tam action alleging violations of both federal and state false claims prevention acts related to a clinical laboratory testing conspiracy carried out by Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eloyalty rewards corporation\u003c/strong\u003e from a hostile takeover of its board of directors by obtaining an injunction preventing the expansion of the board of directors. Decision affirmed by the Texas Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003elarge steel fabrication company\u003c/strong\u003e in bet-the-company suit against competitor. Obtained early injunction against competitor restraining the competitor\u0026rsquo;s theft and unlawful use of trade secrets. After litigating for two years, obtained successful settlement for client on eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e in case alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation when portfolio company defaulted on certain debts. Obtained dismissal of all claims against fund totaling more than US$7M.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a \u003cstrong\u003eportfolio of oil and gas companies\u003c/strong\u003e against wrongful termination and breach of contract allegations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003egroup of vascular surgeons\u003c/strong\u003e against wrongful termination claims and obtained dismissal of numerous claims and defendants prior to trial and a take nothing judgment on all remaining claims following trial.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“Up and Coming Practitioner” - General Commercial Litigation","detail":"Chambers USA, 2024–2025"},{"title":"“500 X – The Next Generation”- Complex Commercial Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2024–2025"},{"title":"“Under 40 Hot List” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2020–2023"},{"title":"“Future Star” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2021–2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2024–2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America ®: Ones to Watch, 2021–2023"},{"title":"“Women in Business” List","detail":"Dallas Business Journal, 2023"},{"title":"“40 \u0026 Under” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2020–2023"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2026"},{"title":"“Super Lawyers Rising Stars”","detail":"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2018–2019, 2021, and 2023"},{"title":"“Up-and-Coming 50: Women Texas Rising Stars” ","detail":"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2023"},{"title":"“Texas Trailblazer”","detail":"Texas Lawyers, 2019"},{"title":"Named to “20 Under 40” List","detail":"Park Cities People, 2019"},{"title":"Professional Excellence Honors “On the Rise”","detail":"Texas Lawyers, 2019"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"SMU Deadman School of Law"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13384}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-03T15:07:24.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-03T15:07:24.000Z","searchable_text":"Eash{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Up and Coming Practitioner” - General Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2024–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 X – The Next Generation”- Complex Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2024–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Under 40 Hot List” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2020–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Future Star” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2021–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2024–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Property Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America ®: Ones to Watch, 2021–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Women in Business” List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Dallas Business Journal, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“40 \u0026amp; Under” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2020–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Future Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Super Lawyers Rising Stars”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2018–2019, 2021, and 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Up-and-Coming 50: Women Texas Rising Stars” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Monthly Magazine, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Texas Trailblazer”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyers, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to “20 Under 40” List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Park Cities People, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Professional Excellence Honors “On the Rise”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyers, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Order of the Coif\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"SMU Deadman School of Law\"}{{ FIELD }}Obtained dismissal of class claims for multi-level marketing organization in bet-the-company class action after successfully compelling arbitration and enforcement of class-action waiver.{{ FIELD }}Representing multiple multi-level marketing organizations in bet-the-company class action litigation involving pyramid scheme allegations under RICO and federal securities laws.{{ FIELD }}Advising numerous multi-level marketing organizations regarding amendments to their governing documents and contracts with independent contractors.{{ FIELD }}Represented Fortune 100 computer company against patent infringement claims and obtained dismissal of the claims following numerous dispositive and favorable Markman.{{ FIELD }}Represented Fortune 100 computer company against patent infringement claims and after exposing legal flaws in the plaintiff’s case, obtained favorable settlement for my client.{{ FIELD }}Representing relators in qui tam action alleging violations of both federal and state false claims prevention acts related to a clinical laboratory testing conspiracy carried out by Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings.{{ FIELD }}Defended loyalty rewards corporation from a hostile takeover of its board of directors by obtaining an injunction preventing the expansion of the board of directors. Decision affirmed by the Texas Court of Appeals.{{ FIELD }}Represented large steel fabrication company in bet-the-company suit against competitor. Obtained early injunction against competitor restraining the competitor’s theft and unlawful use of trade secrets. After litigating for two years, obtained successful settlement for client on eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented private equity fund in case alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation when portfolio company defaulted on certain debts. Obtained dismissal of all claims against fund totaling more than US$7M.{{ FIELD }}Representing a portfolio of oil and gas companies against wrongful termination and breach of contract allegations.{{ FIELD }}Represented a group of vascular surgeons against wrongful termination claims and obtained dismissal of numerous claims and defendants prior to trial and a take nothing judgment on all remaining claims following trial.{{ FIELD }}Katrina is a trial lawyer and litigator with a passion for bet-the-business complex commercial, class action, intellectual property, and qui tam disputes. She is known for top-notch client service, creative problem solving, and courtroom excellence. \nKatrina brings extensive experience across a broad spectrum of commercial disputes, including class action defense, fraud, breach of contract, non-compete and non-solicitation, partnership disputes, business torts, unfair competition, patent and trademark infringement, whistleblowing, and securities fraud. This breadth of experience allows her to approach each matter with efficiency, clarity, and strategic precision. Katrina understands that true success extends beyond legal victories—winning means aligning litigation strategy with her client’s overarching business objectives.\nKatrina’s experience representing direct‑selling organizations is particularly notable. She was recognized by Texas Lawyer as a “Trailblazer” for her work defending direct‑selling companies in high‑stakes, bet‑the‑business disputes. On the litigation front, she has successfully defended dozens of direct‑selling companies in class actions and downline‑raiding cases.\nHer work in this space extends well beyond litigation. Katrina is frequently called upon to defend direct‑selling and other companies facing Federal Trade Commission and state regulatory investigations, advise on regulatory compliance, and guide clients through high‑profile publicity crises. In each instance, she helps clients navigate risk decisively while protecting both their legal position and their brand. Partner “Up and Coming Practitioner” - General Commercial Litigation Chambers USA, 2024–2025 “500 X – The Next Generation”- Complex Commercial Litigation Lawdragon, 2024–2025 “Under 40 Hot List”  Benchmark Litigation, 2020–2023 “Future Star”  Benchmark Litigation, 2021–2026 Commercial Litigation The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2024–2026 Intellectual Property Litigation The Best Lawyers in America ®, 2026 Commercial Litigation The Best Lawyers in America ®: Ones to Watch, 2021–2023 “Women in Business” List Dallas Business Journal, 2023 “40 \u0026amp; Under”  Benchmark Litigation US, 2020–2023 “Future Star” Benchmark Litigation US, 2026 “Super Lawyers Rising Stars” Texas Monthly Magazine, 2018–2019, 2021, and 2023 “Up-and-Coming 50: Women Texas Rising Stars”  Texas Monthly Magazine, 2023 “Texas Trailblazer” Texas Lawyers, 2019 Named to “20 Under 40” List Park Cities People, 2019 Professional Excellence Honors “On the Rise” Texas Lawyers, 2019 Order of the Coif SMU Deadman School of Law University of North Texas  Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Texas Lifetime Fellow, Dallas Bar Association Member, Board of Directors, Park Cities Republican Women (2024-2026) Law Clerk, Hon. Chad Everingham, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Obtained dismissal of class claims for multi-level marketing organization in bet-the-company class action after successfully compelling arbitration and enforcement of class-action waiver. Representing multiple multi-level marketing organizations in bet-the-company class action litigation involving pyramid scheme allegations under RICO and federal securities laws. Advising numerous multi-level marketing organizations regarding amendments to their governing documents and contracts with independent contractors. Represented Fortune 100 computer company against patent infringement claims and obtained dismissal of the claims following numerous dispositive and favorable Markman. Represented Fortune 100 computer company against patent infringement claims and after exposing legal flaws in the plaintiff’s case, obtained favorable settlement for my client. Representing relators in qui tam action alleging violations of both federal and state false claims prevention acts related to a clinical laboratory testing conspiracy carried out by Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings. Defended loyalty rewards corporation from a hostile takeover of its board of directors by obtaining an injunction preventing the expansion of the board of directors. Decision affirmed by the Texas Court of Appeals. Represented large steel fabrication company in bet-the-company suit against competitor. Obtained early injunction against competitor restraining the competitor’s theft and unlawful use of trade secrets. After litigating for two years, obtained successful settlement for client on eve of trial. Represented private equity fund in case alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation when portfolio company defaulted on certain debts. Obtained dismissal of all claims against fund totaling more than US$7M. Representing a portfolio of oil and gas companies against wrongful termination and breach of contract allegations. Represented a group of vascular surgeons against wrongful termination claims and obtained dismissal of numerous claims and defendants prior to trial and a take nothing judgment on all remaining claims following trial.","searchable_name":"Katrina G. Eash","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446145,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6835,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJordan is a versatile and experienced litigator who regularly is called on to handle complex commercial and bankruptcy disputes. Jordan consistently thinks outside the box\u0026mdash;both before litigation is filed and also when advocating in court or arbitration. His wide range of experience includes representing energy companies, private equity firms, and financial institutions in a variety of commercial disputes, defending prominent companies in litigation brought by state attorneys general, and representing debtors, creditors, sponsors, and other stakeholders in litigated and consensual restructuring processes.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJordan\u0026rsquo;s commercial litigation experience includes, among other things, contract disputes, business torts, oil and gas disputes, fraud and misrepresentation claims, lender liability, collections, claims under state deceptive trade practices acts, antitrust claims, price-gouging claims, and real-estate litigation.\u0026nbsp; He also has spent a significant amount of time defending lawyers and law firms in professional liability cases and advising on ethical issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJordan has significant experience presenting and cross-examining witnesses, attacking and defending complex valuations and damage models, and navigating difficult fiduciary and attorney-client privilege issues. \u0026nbsp;He also routinely advises clients on risk and performance issues involving existing and potential contracts, including with respect to mergers, acquisitions, payments, and other significant transactions.\u0026nbsp; In addition to his client work, Jordan regularly speaks on matters ranging from legal ethics to the unique aspects of litigating in bankruptcy court.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"jordan-leu","email":"jleu@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHighlights\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of a private equity fund in an arbitration dispute over the enforceability of joint operating agreement (JOA) provisions; obtained summary disposition of the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s primary defense; case thereafter resolved by agreement (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs first-chair attorney, obtained judgment on partial findings in favor of lender-clients during trial of equity owner\u0026rsquo;s claims under the Uniform Commercial Code (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs one of the lead attorneys, successfully defended manufacturer against antitrust claims in an eight-day jury trial (D. Del.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs first-chair attorney, obtained $19 million arbitration award in favor of bank on defaulted loans (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an integrated oil and gas company as debtor in chapter 11 cases where the confirmed plan deleveraged more than $650 million in a debt-for-equity transaction and two significant royalty and working interest owner class actions were certified and settled post-confirmation (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eJudgment rendered for law firm under Rule 12(b)(6) in suit brought by client\u0026rsquo;s insurer; Court of Appeals held that law firm was immune from suit (5th Cir.; E.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRestructuring Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDelivered closing argument at confirmation hearing on behalf of industrial ceramics and oilfield products manufacturers as chapter 11 debtors; pre-negotiated chapter 11 plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an agricultural holding company and a breed registry throughout their heavily litigated chapter 11 cases; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an ad hoc group of member-owner electric power cooperatives in an electric power company\u0026rsquo;s bankruptcy case caused by Winter Storm Uri (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented purchaser of liquidating energy company\u0026rsquo;s assets; lead litigator post-sale in settling widespread royalty litigation (Bankr. W.D. Pa.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for physician association and management services organization in cure and related disputes in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eProspect Medical Holdings\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting secured creditor and contract counterparty in sale, cure, and related disputes in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGenesis Healthcare\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigation counsel for foreign affiliate of chapter 11 debtor in settling trust-fund and other claims related to customer payments (D. Del.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in representation of equity sponsor and certain officers and directors of upstream company in connection with its chapter 11 cases, which resulted in a $1.3 billion credit-bid asset sale, a global settlement with key stakeholders, and confirmation of a chapter 11 plan (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented sponsor and direct parent of chapter 11 debtors in contested chapter 11 cases which involved key settlements that paved the way for a consensual reorganization of a legacy power generation business and the continued operation of new data center and crypto mining growth initiatives (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented offshore-focused upstream company as debtor in heavily litigated bankruptcy; plan confirmed, eliminating approximately $3.5 billion in debt (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented ad hoc group of lenders in prepackaged chapter 11 cases of oilfield services company (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented private equity firms as equity owners of oil and gas company; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLead attorney defending oilfield water solutions provider against contractual and tort claims brought by mineral interest owner (S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSummary judgment for national bank on 30 of 31 lender liability counterclaims; bank prevailed on the remaining counterclaim at trial (E.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTake-nothing summary disposition for national bank in lender liability case based on alleged wire fraud against bank\u0026rsquo;s customer (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting major automotive manufacturer and its affiliate in multiple lawsuits filed by state attorneys general under deceptive trade practices statutes (Multiple Courts)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented agricultural company in litigation filed by Texas attorney general under deceptive trade practices statute; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist.\u0026mdash;Harris Cnty.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigation counsel for seller in settling contractual and tort claims arising out of business sale\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMulti-year representation of non-bank lender in class action and various related suits arising from the failure of a home-healthcare program; class settlement approved (Multiple Courts)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended private equity fund and affiliates against tortious interference and breach of contract claims; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended former president and CEO of a South Texas bank in an OCC regulatory investigation; after responding to numerous subpoenas and the client\u0026rsquo;s deposition, the OCC decided not to assess a civil money penalty (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented non-operator in marketing fee dispute with operator; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented energy company in operatorship dispute and subsequent bankruptcy litigation (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n; Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented lender in simultaneously pending Bankruptcy Court and District Court cases involving lender liability and fraudulent transfer claims (N.D. Tex.; Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a national bank in a lender liability case based on embezzlement by bank customer\u0026rsquo;s employee; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Fort Bend County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented former directors and officers of a South Texas bank in litigation brought by bank shareholders based on private placement memorandum (Tex. Dist. - Hidalgo County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended current and former bank directors in a variety of matters involving allegations of unsafe or unsound practices, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, false entry, and other violations of law and regulation (Office of Financial Institution Adjudication)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProfessional Liability Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDismissal with prejudice of all claims brought against court-appointed receiver and receiver\u0026rsquo;s law firm; affirmed by Court of Appeals (5th Cir.; N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSummary judgment for law firm in legal malpractice suit arising from foreclosure; affirmed by Court of Appeals (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Dallas County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePartial summary judgment for law firm in professional liability suit by bankruptcy trustee alleging malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting (Bankr. N.D. Tex.; N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented law firm in professional responsibility litigation brought by physician and affiliated company; district court upheld privilege assertions and was affirmed by Court of Appeals; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Harris County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDismissal of all claims brought against law firm on theories including successor liability, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent transfer (S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":18,"guid":"18.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1231,"guid":"1231.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1715,"guid":"1715.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Leu","nick_name":"Jordan","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Jordan","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2009-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"W.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the Texas Rising Stars list","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2019−2024"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-leu-4033427/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJordan is a versatile and experienced litigator who regularly is called on to handle complex commercial and bankruptcy disputes. Jordan consistently thinks outside the box\u0026mdash;both before litigation is filed and also when advocating in court or arbitration. His wide range of experience includes representing energy companies, private equity firms, and financial institutions in a variety of commercial disputes, defending prominent companies in litigation brought by state attorneys general, and representing debtors, creditors, sponsors, and other stakeholders in litigated and consensual restructuring processes.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJordan\u0026rsquo;s commercial litigation experience includes, among other things, contract disputes, business torts, oil and gas disputes, fraud and misrepresentation claims, lender liability, collections, claims under state deceptive trade practices acts, antitrust claims, price-gouging claims, and real-estate litigation.\u0026nbsp; He also has spent a significant amount of time defending lawyers and law firms in professional liability cases and advising on ethical issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJordan has significant experience presenting and cross-examining witnesses, attacking and defending complex valuations and damage models, and navigating difficult fiduciary and attorney-client privilege issues. \u0026nbsp;He also routinely advises clients on risk and performance issues involving existing and potential contracts, including with respect to mergers, acquisitions, payments, and other significant transactions.\u0026nbsp; In addition to his client work, Jordan regularly speaks on matters ranging from legal ethics to the unique aspects of litigating in bankruptcy court.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHighlights\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of a private equity fund in an arbitration dispute over the enforceability of joint operating agreement (JOA) provisions; obtained summary disposition of the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s primary defense; case thereafter resolved by agreement (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs first-chair attorney, obtained judgment on partial findings in favor of lender-clients during trial of equity owner\u0026rsquo;s claims under the Uniform Commercial Code (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs one of the lead attorneys, successfully defended manufacturer against antitrust claims in an eight-day jury trial (D. Del.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs first-chair attorney, obtained $19 million arbitration award in favor of bank on defaulted loans (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an integrated oil and gas company as debtor in chapter 11 cases where the confirmed plan deleveraged more than $650 million in a debt-for-equity transaction and two significant royalty and working interest owner class actions were certified and settled post-confirmation (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eJudgment rendered for law firm under Rule 12(b)(6) in suit brought by client\u0026rsquo;s insurer; Court of Appeals held that law firm was immune from suit (5th Cir.; E.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRestructuring Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDelivered closing argument at confirmation hearing on behalf of industrial ceramics and oilfield products manufacturers as chapter 11 debtors; pre-negotiated chapter 11 plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an agricultural holding company and a breed registry throughout their heavily litigated chapter 11 cases; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in the representation of an ad hoc group of member-owner electric power cooperatives in an electric power company\u0026rsquo;s bankruptcy case caused by Winter Storm Uri (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented purchaser of liquidating energy company\u0026rsquo;s assets; lead litigator post-sale in settling widespread royalty litigation (Bankr. W.D. Pa.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for physician association and management services organization in cure and related disputes in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eProspect Medical Holdings\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting secured creditor and contract counterparty in sale, cure, and related disputes in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGenesis Healthcare\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigation counsel for foreign affiliate of chapter 11 debtor in settling trust-fund and other claims related to customer payments (D. Del.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigator in representation of equity sponsor and certain officers and directors of upstream company in connection with its chapter 11 cases, which resulted in a $1.3 billion credit-bid asset sale, a global settlement with key stakeholders, and confirmation of a chapter 11 plan (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented sponsor and direct parent of chapter 11 debtors in contested chapter 11 cases which involved key settlements that paved the way for a consensual reorganization of a legacy power generation business and the continued operation of new data center and crypto mining growth initiatives (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented offshore-focused upstream company as debtor in heavily litigated bankruptcy; plan confirmed, eliminating approximately $3.5 billion in debt (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented ad hoc group of lenders in prepackaged chapter 11 cases of oilfield services company (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented private equity firms as equity owners of oil and gas company; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLead attorney defending oilfield water solutions provider against contractual and tort claims brought by mineral interest owner (S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSummary judgment for national bank on 30 of 31 lender liability counterclaims; bank prevailed on the remaining counterclaim at trial (E.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTake-nothing summary disposition for national bank in lender liability case based on alleged wire fraud against bank\u0026rsquo;s customer (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting major automotive manufacturer and its affiliate in multiple lawsuits filed by state attorneys general under deceptive trade practices statutes (Multiple Courts)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented agricultural company in litigation filed by Texas attorney general under deceptive trade practices statute; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist.\u0026mdash;Harris Cnty.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead litigation counsel for seller in settling contractual and tort claims arising out of business sale\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMulti-year representation of non-bank lender in class action and various related suits arising from the failure of a home-healthcare program; class settlement approved (Multiple Courts)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended private equity fund and affiliates against tortious interference and breach of contract claims; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended former president and CEO of a South Texas bank in an OCC regulatory investigation; after responding to numerous subpoenas and the client\u0026rsquo;s deposition, the OCC decided not to assess a civil money penalty (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented non-operator in marketing fee dispute with operator; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented energy company in operatorship dispute and subsequent bankruptcy litigation (Am. Arb. Ass\u0026rsquo;n; Bankr. S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented lender in simultaneously pending Bankruptcy Court and District Court cases involving lender liability and fraudulent transfer claims (N.D. Tex.; Bankr. N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a national bank in a lender liability case based on embezzlement by bank customer\u0026rsquo;s employee; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Fort Bend County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented former directors and officers of a South Texas bank in litigation brought by bank shareholders based on private placement memorandum (Tex. Dist. - Hidalgo County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended current and former bank directors in a variety of matters involving allegations of unsafe or unsound practices, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, false entry, and other violations of law and regulation (Office of Financial Institution Adjudication)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProfessional Liability Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDismissal with prejudice of all claims brought against court-appointed receiver and receiver\u0026rsquo;s law firm; affirmed by Court of Appeals (5th Cir.; N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSummary judgment for law firm in legal malpractice suit arising from foreclosure; affirmed by Court of Appeals (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Dallas County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePartial summary judgment for law firm in professional liability suit by bankruptcy trustee alleging malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting (Bankr. N.D. Tex.; N.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented law firm in professional responsibility litigation brought by physician and affiliated company; district court upheld privilege assertions and was affirmed by Court of Appeals; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. \u0026ndash; Harris County.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDismissal of all claims brought against law firm on theories including successor liability, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent transfer (S.D. Tex.)\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the Texas Rising Stars list","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2019−2024"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12080}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-24T22:41:32.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-24T22:41:32.000Z","searchable_text":"Leu{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the Texas Rising Stars list\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2019−2024\"}{{ FIELD }}Highlights\nLead litigator in the representation of a private equity fund in an arbitration dispute over the enforceability of joint operating agreement (JOA) provisions; obtained summary disposition of the opposing party’s primary defense; case thereafter resolved by agreement (Am. Arb. Ass’n){{ FIELD }}As first-chair attorney, obtained judgment on partial findings in favor of lender-clients during trial of equity owner’s claims under the Uniform Commercial Code (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}As one of the lead attorneys, successfully defended manufacturer against antitrust claims in an eight-day jury trial (D. Del.){{ FIELD }}As first-chair attorney, obtained $19 million arbitration award in favor of bank on defaulted loans (Am. Arb. Ass’n){{ FIELD }}Lead litigator in the representation of an integrated oil and gas company as debtor in chapter 11 cases where the confirmed plan deleveraged more than $650 million in a debt-for-equity transaction and two significant royalty and working interest owner class actions were certified and settled post-confirmation (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Judgment rendered for law firm under Rule 12(b)(6) in suit brought by client’s insurer; Court of Appeals held that law firm was immune from suit (5th Cir.; E.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Restructuring Litigation{{ FIELD }}Delivered closing argument at confirmation hearing on behalf of industrial ceramics and oilfield products manufacturers as chapter 11 debtors; pre-negotiated chapter 11 plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Lead litigator in the representation of an agricultural holding company and a breed registry throughout their heavily litigated chapter 11 cases; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Lead litigator in the representation of an ad hoc group of member-owner electric power cooperatives in an electric power company’s bankruptcy case caused by Winter Storm Uri (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented purchaser of liquidating energy company’s assets; lead litigator post-sale in settling widespread royalty litigation (Bankr. W.D. Pa.){{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for physician association and management services organization in cure and related disputes in the Prospect Medical Holdings chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Representing secured creditor and contract counterparty in sale, cure, and related disputes in the Genesis Healthcare chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Lead litigation counsel for foreign affiliate of chapter 11 debtor in settling trust-fund and other claims related to customer payments (D. Del.){{ FIELD }}Lead litigator in representation of equity sponsor and certain officers and directors of upstream company in connection with its chapter 11 cases, which resulted in a $1.3 billion credit-bid asset sale, a global settlement with key stakeholders, and confirmation of a chapter 11 plan (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented sponsor and direct parent of chapter 11 debtors in contested chapter 11 cases which involved key settlements that paved the way for a consensual reorganization of a legacy power generation business and the continued operation of new data center and crypto mining growth initiatives (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented offshore-focused upstream company as debtor in heavily litigated bankruptcy; plan confirmed, eliminating approximately $3.5 billion in debt (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented ad hoc group of lenders in prepackaged chapter 11 cases of oilfield services company (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented private equity firms as equity owners of oil and gas company; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation\nLead attorney defending oilfield water solutions provider against contractual and tort claims brought by mineral interest owner (S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Summary judgment for national bank on 30 of 31 lender liability counterclaims; bank prevailed on the remaining counterclaim at trial (E.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Take-nothing summary disposition for national bank in lender liability case based on alleged wire fraud against bank’s customer (Am. Arb. Ass’n){{ FIELD }}Representing major automotive manufacturer and its affiliate in multiple lawsuits filed by state attorneys general under deceptive trade practices statutes (Multiple Courts){{ FIELD }}Represented agricultural company in litigation filed by Texas attorney general under deceptive trade practices statute; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist.—Harris Cnty.){{ FIELD }}Lead litigation counsel for seller in settling contractual and tort claims arising out of business sale{{ FIELD }}Multi-year representation of non-bank lender in class action and various related suits arising from the failure of a home-healthcare program; class settlement approved (Multiple Courts){{ FIELD }}Defended private equity fund and affiliates against tortious interference and breach of contract claims; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Defended former president and CEO of a South Texas bank in an OCC regulatory investigation; after responding to numerous subpoenas and the client’s deposition, the OCC decided not to assess a civil money penalty (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency){{ FIELD }}Represented non-operator in marketing fee dispute with operator; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented energy company in operatorship dispute and subsequent bankruptcy litigation (Am. Arb. Ass’n; Bankr. S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented lender in simultaneously pending Bankruptcy Court and District Court cases involving lender liability and fraudulent transfer claims (N.D. Tex.; Bankr. N.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented a national bank in a lender liability case based on embezzlement by bank customer’s employee; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. – Fort Bend County.){{ FIELD }}Represented former directors and officers of a South Texas bank in litigation brought by bank shareholders based on private placement memorandum (Tex. Dist. - Hidalgo County.){{ FIELD }}Defended current and former bank directors in a variety of matters involving allegations of unsafe or unsound practices, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, false entry, and other violations of law and regulation (Office of Financial Institution Adjudication){{ FIELD }}Professional Liability Litigation\nDismissal with prejudice of all claims brought against court-appointed receiver and receiver’s law firm; affirmed by Court of Appeals (5th Cir.; N.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Summary judgment for law firm in legal malpractice suit arising from foreclosure; affirmed by Court of Appeals (Tex. Dist. – Dallas County.){{ FIELD }}Partial summary judgment for law firm in professional liability suit by bankruptcy trustee alleging malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting (Bankr. N.D. Tex.; N.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Represented law firm in professional responsibility litigation brought by physician and affiliated company; district court upheld privilege assertions and was affirmed by Court of Appeals; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. – Harris County.){{ FIELD }}Dismissal of all claims brought against law firm on theories including successor liability, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent transfer (S.D. Tex.){{ FIELD }}Jordan is a versatile and experienced litigator who regularly is called on to handle complex commercial and bankruptcy disputes. Jordan consistently thinks outside the box—both before litigation is filed and also when advocating in court or arbitration. His wide range of experience includes representing energy companies, private equity firms, and financial institutions in a variety of commercial disputes, defending prominent companies in litigation brought by state attorneys general, and representing debtors, creditors, sponsors, and other stakeholders in litigated and consensual restructuring processes. \nJordan’s commercial litigation experience includes, among other things, contract disputes, business torts, oil and gas disputes, fraud and misrepresentation claims, lender liability, collections, claims under state deceptive trade practices acts, antitrust claims, price-gouging claims, and real-estate litigation.  He also has spent a significant amount of time defending lawyers and law firms in professional liability cases and advising on ethical issues.\nJordan has significant experience presenting and cross-examining witnesses, attacking and defending complex valuations and damage models, and navigating difficult fiduciary and attorney-client privilege issues.  He also routinely advises clients on risk and performance issues involving existing and potential contracts, including with respect to mergers, acquisitions, payments, and other significant transactions.  In addition to his client work, Jordan regularly speaks on matters ranging from legal ethics to the unique aspects of litigating in bankruptcy court. Partner Selected to the Texas Rising Stars list Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2019−2024 The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law Harvard University Harvard Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Texas American Bankruptcy Institute Dallas Bar Association Harvard Club of Dallas Highlights\nLead litigator in the representation of a private equity fund in an arbitration dispute over the enforceability of joint operating agreement (JOA) provisions; obtained summary disposition of the opposing party’s primary defense; case thereafter resolved by agreement (Am. Arb. Ass’n) As first-chair attorney, obtained judgment on partial findings in favor of lender-clients during trial of equity owner’s claims under the Uniform Commercial Code (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) As one of the lead attorneys, successfully defended manufacturer against antitrust claims in an eight-day jury trial (D. Del.) As first-chair attorney, obtained $19 million arbitration award in favor of bank on defaulted loans (Am. Arb. Ass’n) Lead litigator in the representation of an integrated oil and gas company as debtor in chapter 11 cases where the confirmed plan deleveraged more than $650 million in a debt-for-equity transaction and two significant royalty and working interest owner class actions were certified and settled post-confirmation (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Judgment rendered for law firm under Rule 12(b)(6) in suit brought by client’s insurer; Court of Appeals held that law firm was immune from suit (5th Cir.; E.D. Tex.) Restructuring Litigation Delivered closing argument at confirmation hearing on behalf of industrial ceramics and oilfield products manufacturers as chapter 11 debtors; pre-negotiated chapter 11 plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Lead litigator in the representation of an agricultural holding company and a breed registry throughout their heavily litigated chapter 11 cases; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Lead litigator in the representation of an ad hoc group of member-owner electric power cooperatives in an electric power company’s bankruptcy case caused by Winter Storm Uri (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented purchaser of liquidating energy company’s assets; lead litigator post-sale in settling widespread royalty litigation (Bankr. W.D. Pa.) Lead counsel for physician association and management services organization in cure and related disputes in the Prospect Medical Holdings chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.) Representing secured creditor and contract counterparty in sale, cure, and related disputes in the Genesis Healthcare chapter 11 cases (Bankr. N.D. Tex.) Lead litigation counsel for foreign affiliate of chapter 11 debtor in settling trust-fund and other claims related to customer payments (D. Del.) Lead litigator in representation of equity sponsor and certain officers and directors of upstream company in connection with its chapter 11 cases, which resulted in a $1.3 billion credit-bid asset sale, a global settlement with key stakeholders, and confirmation of a chapter 11 plan (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented sponsor and direct parent of chapter 11 debtors in contested chapter 11 cases which involved key settlements that paved the way for a consensual reorganization of a legacy power generation business and the continued operation of new data center and crypto mining growth initiatives (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented offshore-focused upstream company as debtor in heavily litigated bankruptcy; plan confirmed, eliminating approximately $3.5 billion in debt (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented ad hoc group of lenders in prepackaged chapter 11 cases of oilfield services company (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented private equity firms as equity owners of oil and gas company; plan confirmed (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Commercial Litigation\nLead attorney defending oilfield water solutions provider against contractual and tort claims brought by mineral interest owner (S.D. Tex.) Summary judgment for national bank on 30 of 31 lender liability counterclaims; bank prevailed on the remaining counterclaim at trial (E.D. Tex.) Take-nothing summary disposition for national bank in lender liability case based on alleged wire fraud against bank’s customer (Am. Arb. Ass’n) Representing major automotive manufacturer and its affiliate in multiple lawsuits filed by state attorneys general under deceptive trade practices statutes (Multiple Courts) Represented agricultural company in litigation filed by Texas attorney general under deceptive trade practices statute; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist.—Harris Cnty.) Lead litigation counsel for seller in settling contractual and tort claims arising out of business sale Multi-year representation of non-bank lender in class action and various related suits arising from the failure of a home-healthcare program; class settlement approved (Multiple Courts) Defended private equity fund and affiliates against tortious interference and breach of contract claims; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Defended former president and CEO of a South Texas bank in an OCC regulatory investigation; after responding to numerous subpoenas and the client’s deposition, the OCC decided not to assess a civil money penalty (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) Represented non-operator in marketing fee dispute with operator; matter resolved by agreement (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented energy company in operatorship dispute and subsequent bankruptcy litigation (Am. Arb. Ass’n; Bankr. S.D. Tex.) Represented lender in simultaneously pending Bankruptcy Court and District Court cases involving lender liability and fraudulent transfer claims (N.D. Tex.; Bankr. N.D. Tex.) Represented a national bank in a lender liability case based on embezzlement by bank customer’s employee; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. – Fort Bend County.) Represented former directors and officers of a South Texas bank in litigation brought by bank shareholders based on private placement memorandum (Tex. Dist. - Hidalgo County.) Defended current and former bank directors in a variety of matters involving allegations of unsafe or unsound practices, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, false entry, and other violations of law and regulation (Office of Financial Institution Adjudication) Professional Liability Litigation\nDismissal with prejudice of all claims brought against court-appointed receiver and receiver’s law firm; affirmed by Court of Appeals (5th Cir.; N.D. Tex.) Summary judgment for law firm in legal malpractice suit arising from foreclosure; affirmed by Court of Appeals (Tex. Dist. – Dallas County.) Partial summary judgment for law firm in professional liability suit by bankruptcy trustee alleging malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting (Bankr. N.D. Tex.; N.D. Tex.) Represented law firm in professional responsibility litigation brought by physician and affiliated company; district court upheld privilege assertions and was affirmed by Court of Appeals; matter resolved by agreement (Tex. Dist. – Harris County.) Dismissal of all claims brought against law firm on theories including successor liability, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent transfer (S.D. Tex.)","searchable_name":"Jordan W. Leu","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":445532,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7304,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRex Mann is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on patent litigation and other complex commercial litigation matters. Although his patent litigation practice is nationwide, he has extensive experience specifically in patent-heavy districts, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. On commercial matters he often represents technology companies or works on matters involving complex technology, and his background in engineering enables him to deeply understand clients\u0026rsquo; technologies and businesses to help them better achieve their goals. Rex\u0026rsquo;s work continues to garner him honors from legal publications such as\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026reg;\u003c/sup\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;IAM Patent 1000, Lawdragon\u003c/em\u003e, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex\u0026rsquo;s intellectual property practice primarily consists of complex patent and trade secret litigation. He has handled bet-the-company patent and trade secret matters, including taking them to trial, and winning. Outside of litigation, he advises his clients on technology licensing issues, policies relating to intellectual property, and targeted patent prosecution advice relating to licensing and litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Rex\u0026rsquo;s patent litigation practice is heavily concentrated on matters arising in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. In fact, he began his legal career as a law clerk for the Honorable T. John Ward in the Eastern District of Texas, where he gained significant experience in federal trial practice and patent litigation, given the district\u0026rsquo;s intense patent trial docket.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex has significant trial experience and has tried more than 20 cases or arbitrations as first chair or in an otherwise stand-up role, and he has experience in all phases of trial. In addition to his civil trial work, Rex spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where he tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict and obtained a guilty verdict in each one.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex\u0026rsquo;s commercial litigation practice has included a wide variety of matters, including breach of contract, business torts, consumer class actions, RICO violations, securities laws violations, whistleblower or False Claims Act litigation, employment, fraud, suits against the government or government officials, and other related disputes. Given his background in engineering, the work Rex does for his commercial clients often involves technology issues. Moreover, his undergraduate and graduate degrees in civil and environmental engineering are helpful when working on matters in the environmental and oil and gas industries.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"rex-mann","email":"rmann@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalliburton v. U.S. Well Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) As trial counsel, prevailed for \u003cstrong\u003eU.S. Well Services\u003c/strong\u003e in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that U.S. Well Services infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of U.S. Well Services\u0026rsquo; fracturing sites\u0026mdash;a win that\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAm Law\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;recognized with a \u0026ldquo;Litigator of the Week\u0026rdquo; first-runner-up nod. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Halliburton\u0026rsquo;s technical experts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(ITC) Served as trial counsel to defend \u003cstrong\u003eAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD)\u003c/strong\u003e in a massive ITC action brought against AMD by its competitor Realtek Semiconductor Corp. Realtek accused AMD of infringing three patents relating to integrated circuit designs. AMD faced an exclusion order and a cease-and-desist order at the ITC. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron\u0026nbsp;Elliot\u0026rsquo;s decision found that all asserted claims of two of the patents were invalid for multiple reasons. For the third patent, he ruled that all asserted claims were not infringed by AMD, and that all but one of those claims were also invalid. Rex conducted multiple cross-examinations and direct examinations of expert witnesses and fact witnesses in the five-day trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFlypsi, Inc. v. Google, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for plaintiff \u003cstrong\u003eFlypsi\u003c/strong\u003e, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google\u0026rsquo;s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flypsi\u0026rsquo;s invention, the jury rejected Google\u0026rsquo;s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flypsi US$12 million for Google\u0026rsquo;s infringement. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Google\u0026rsquo;s expert and company representative at trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eMedtronic\u003c/strong\u003e in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. Rex conducted a key cross-examination of the inventor and put on Medtronic\u0026rsquo;s noninfringement and invalidity expert. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Rex and his team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eRyan Hardin and Andrew Hill\u003c/strong\u003e, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Lead counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eFreshworks\u003c/strong\u003e in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Lead trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eAtieva Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, LLC v. Alixa Rx LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Served as counsel for defendants and obtained a defense verdict in jury trial on claims of trade secret misappropriation, fraud, and patent infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCeats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al\u003c/em\u003e. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly US$300 million for the defendants.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client \u003cstrong\u003eUnbnd\u003c/strong\u003e and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing that Rex led, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSmith v. LifeVantage Corporation et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Utah) Counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eLifeVantage\u003c/strong\u003e in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, antitrust violations, securities laws violations, and unjust enrichment. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won a motion to dismiss on several of the claims, and the case proceeded through class discovery on remaining claims, where the team prevailed for LifeVantage in achieving denial of class certification. The case settled shortly after class certification was denied.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConfidential AAA Arbitration in Dallas. Trial counsel for respondent in a confidential arbitration brought by a plaintiff CEO with breach of contract claims close to US$10 million. After a multiday evidentiary hearing where Rex put on a key witness for the company, Rex and the Winston team achieved a complete defense victory and an award of attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees against the claimant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConfidential JAMS Arbitration in San Francisco. Lead trial counsel for then-\u003cstrong\u003eNFL player\u003c/strong\u003e in a JAMS arbitration wherein a marketing agency filed for arbitration against the NFL player for breach of contract alleging millions of dollars in damages. Brought counterclaims on behalf of the NFL player for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract, among others. Achieved a settlement prior to the evidentiary hearing whereby the marketing agency, despite being the initial plaintiff/claimant, actually paid the client a six-figure payment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eAdvoCare\u003c/strong\u003e in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States of America ex. rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWaterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented developer of a billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFee Smith Sharp \u0026amp; Vitullo LLP et al. v. Deana Strunk et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct.) Trial counsel for defendant in a breach of contract action seeking close to US$10 million in damages. After successfully defeating a motion to compel arbitration through the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and completing discovery, the case settled on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Woodbridge Investments Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) Counsel for defendant in a class action proceeding brought against the bank for aiding and abetting fraud claims, among others, relating to the Woodbridge billion-dollar Ponzi scheme. Case settled after class certification briefing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eProphet Equity LP et al. v. Twin City Insurance Company\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(5th Cir.) Counsel for appellant wherein a reversal was achieved of a summary judgment ruling against client on contractual insurance issues. The case settled shortly after the decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCrothers et al. v. Teton County Board of County Commissioners et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Wyo.) Trial counsel for plaintiffs in an action alleging multiple constitutional violations by various law enforcement officials and agencies in the Teton County area. Also served as appellate counsel for a related criminal proceeding wherein an appeal was sought for various\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrady\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;violations, and argued at the court, along with co-counsel Alan Dershowitz, in the post-trial and appellate phase.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRysher Entertainment et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(L.A. Cnty. Super. Ct., Cal.) Represented \u003cstrong\u003eRysher Entertainment, 2929 Entertainment, and Qualia Capital\u003c/strong\u003e as plaintiffs in a contractual indemnification case arising out of underlying litigation brought by actor Don Johnson related to the television series\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNash Bridges\u003c/em\u003e. Obtained summary judgment from the trial court holding that Cox was liable under the contract, and the case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSabre Corporation, et al. v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.Y. Com. Div.) Represented \u003cstrong\u003eSabre\u003c/strong\u003e and related entities in an insurance coverage case against two insurance companies relating to the insurers\u0026rsquo; failure to indemnify Sabre in a major piece of litigation. Obtained summary judgment at the trial court level declaring that the insurers had a duty to defend Sabre, and a disqualifying conflict of interest prevented insurers from controlling the defense. The case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.\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":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":127,"guid":"127.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":126,"guid":"126.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":763,"guid":"763.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Mann","nick_name":"Rex","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Honorable T. John Ward, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2010 - 2011"}],"first_name":"Rex","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":176,"law_schools":[{"id":2055,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"high honors","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2010-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized as “Up and Coming” and Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2024-2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the “Top 50” in Patent Litigation Report","detail":"Patexia, 2024–2025"},{"title":"Ranked by IAM Patent 1000","detail":"2025"},{"title":"Litigation – Intellectual Property","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026"},{"title":"Litigation – Patent","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch in America, 2021–2023"},{"title":"“Green 500: Leading Environmental Lawyers”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023–2025"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2021–2026"},{"title":"“Texas Lawyer on the Rise” ","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2020"},{"title":"“Up-and-Coming 100: Texas Rising Stars”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2019–2021"},{"title":"“Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2016–2024"},{"title":"Order of the Chancellors","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"},{"title":"Order of the Barristers","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRex Mann is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on patent litigation and other complex commercial litigation matters. Although his patent litigation practice is nationwide, he has extensive experience specifically in patent-heavy districts, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. On commercial matters he often represents technology companies or works on matters involving complex technology, and his background in engineering enables him to deeply understand clients\u0026rsquo; technologies and businesses to help them better achieve their goals. Rex\u0026rsquo;s work continues to garner him honors from legal publications such as\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026reg;\u003c/sup\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;IAM Patent 1000, Lawdragon\u003c/em\u003e, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex\u0026rsquo;s intellectual property practice primarily consists of complex patent and trade secret litigation. He has handled bet-the-company patent and trade secret matters, including taking them to trial, and winning. Outside of litigation, he advises his clients on technology licensing issues, policies relating to intellectual property, and targeted patent prosecution advice relating to licensing and litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Rex\u0026rsquo;s patent litigation practice is heavily concentrated on matters arising in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. In fact, he began his legal career as a law clerk for the Honorable T. John Ward in the Eastern District of Texas, where he gained significant experience in federal trial practice and patent litigation, given the district\u0026rsquo;s intense patent trial docket.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex has significant trial experience and has tried more than 20 cases or arbitrations as first chair or in an otherwise stand-up role, and he has experience in all phases of trial. In addition to his civil trial work, Rex spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where he tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict and obtained a guilty verdict in each one.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRex\u0026rsquo;s commercial litigation practice has included a wide variety of matters, including breach of contract, business torts, consumer class actions, RICO violations, securities laws violations, whistleblower or False Claims Act litigation, employment, fraud, suits against the government or government officials, and other related disputes. Given his background in engineering, the work Rex does for his commercial clients often involves technology issues. Moreover, his undergraduate and graduate degrees in civil and environmental engineering are helpful when working on matters in the environmental and oil and gas industries.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalliburton v. U.S. Well Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) As trial counsel, prevailed for \u003cstrong\u003eU.S. Well Services\u003c/strong\u003e in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that U.S. Well Services infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of U.S. Well Services\u0026rsquo; fracturing sites\u0026mdash;a win that\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAm Law\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;recognized with a \u0026ldquo;Litigator of the Week\u0026rdquo; first-runner-up nod. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Halliburton\u0026rsquo;s technical experts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(ITC) Served as trial counsel to defend \u003cstrong\u003eAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD)\u003c/strong\u003e in a massive ITC action brought against AMD by its competitor Realtek Semiconductor Corp. Realtek accused AMD of infringing three patents relating to integrated circuit designs. AMD faced an exclusion order and a cease-and-desist order at the ITC. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron\u0026nbsp;Elliot\u0026rsquo;s decision found that all asserted claims of two of the patents were invalid for multiple reasons. For the third patent, he ruled that all asserted claims were not infringed by AMD, and that all but one of those claims were also invalid. Rex conducted multiple cross-examinations and direct examinations of expert witnesses and fact witnesses in the five-day trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFlypsi, Inc. v. Google, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for plaintiff \u003cstrong\u003eFlypsi\u003c/strong\u003e, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google\u0026rsquo;s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flypsi\u0026rsquo;s invention, the jury rejected Google\u0026rsquo;s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flypsi US$12 million for Google\u0026rsquo;s infringement. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Google\u0026rsquo;s expert and company representative at trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eMedtronic\u003c/strong\u003e in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. Rex conducted a key cross-examination of the inventor and put on Medtronic\u0026rsquo;s noninfringement and invalidity expert. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Rex and his team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eRyan Hardin and Andrew Hill\u003c/strong\u003e, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Lead counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eFreshworks\u003c/strong\u003e in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Lead trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eAtieva Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, LLC v. Alixa Rx LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Served as counsel for defendants and obtained a defense verdict in jury trial on claims of trade secret misappropriation, fraud, and patent infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCeats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al\u003c/em\u003e. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly US$300 million for the defendants.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client \u003cstrong\u003eUnbnd\u003c/strong\u003e and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing that Rex led, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSmith v. LifeVantage Corporation et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Utah) Counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eLifeVantage\u003c/strong\u003e in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, antitrust violations, securities laws violations, and unjust enrichment. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won a motion to dismiss on several of the claims, and the case proceeded through class discovery on remaining claims, where the team prevailed for LifeVantage in achieving denial of class certification. The case settled shortly after class certification was denied.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConfidential AAA Arbitration in Dallas. Trial counsel for respondent in a confidential arbitration brought by a plaintiff CEO with breach of contract claims close to US$10 million. After a multiday evidentiary hearing where Rex put on a key witness for the company, Rex and the Winston team achieved a complete defense victory and an award of attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees against the claimant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConfidential JAMS Arbitration in San Francisco. Lead trial counsel for then-\u003cstrong\u003eNFL player\u003c/strong\u003e in a JAMS arbitration wherein a marketing agency filed for arbitration against the NFL player for breach of contract alleging millions of dollars in damages. Brought counterclaims on behalf of the NFL player for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract, among others. Achieved a settlement prior to the evidentiary hearing whereby the marketing agency, despite being the initial plaintiff/claimant, actually paid the client a six-figure payment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant \u003cstrong\u003eAdvoCare\u003c/strong\u003e in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States of America ex. rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWaterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented developer of a billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFee Smith Sharp \u0026amp; Vitullo LLP et al. v. Deana Strunk et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct.) Trial counsel for defendant in a breach of contract action seeking close to US$10 million in damages. After successfully defeating a motion to compel arbitration through the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and completing discovery, the case settled on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Woodbridge Investments Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) Counsel for defendant in a class action proceeding brought against the bank for aiding and abetting fraud claims, among others, relating to the Woodbridge billion-dollar Ponzi scheme. Case settled after class certification briefing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eProphet Equity LP et al. v. Twin City Insurance Company\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(5th Cir.) Counsel for appellant wherein a reversal was achieved of a summary judgment ruling against client on contractual insurance issues. The case settled shortly after the decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCrothers et al. v. Teton County Board of County Commissioners et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Wyo.) Trial counsel for plaintiffs in an action alleging multiple constitutional violations by various law enforcement officials and agencies in the Teton County area. Also served as appellate counsel for a related criminal proceeding wherein an appeal was sought for various\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrady\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;violations, and argued at the court, along with co-counsel Alan Dershowitz, in the post-trial and appellate phase.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRysher Entertainment et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(L.A. Cnty. Super. Ct., Cal.) Represented \u003cstrong\u003eRysher Entertainment, 2929 Entertainment, and Qualia Capital\u003c/strong\u003e as plaintiffs in a contractual indemnification case arising out of underlying litigation brought by actor Don Johnson related to the television series\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNash Bridges\u003c/em\u003e. Obtained summary judgment from the trial court holding that Cox was liable under the contract, and the case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSabre Corporation, et al. v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.Y. Com. Div.) Represented \u003cstrong\u003eSabre\u003c/strong\u003e and related entities in an insurance coverage case against two insurance companies relating to the insurers\u0026rsquo; failure to indemnify Sabre in a major piece of litigation. Obtained summary judgment at the trial court level declaring that the insurers had a duty to defend Sabre, and a disqualifying conflict of interest prevented insurers from controlling the defense. The case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized as “Up and Coming” and Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2024-2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the “Top 50” in Patent Litigation Report","detail":"Patexia, 2024–2025"},{"title":"Ranked by IAM Patent 1000","detail":"2025"},{"title":"Litigation – Intellectual Property","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026"},{"title":"Litigation – Patent","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch in America, 2021–2023"},{"title":"“Green 500: Leading Environmental Lawyers”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023–2025"},{"title":"“Future Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2021–2026"},{"title":"“Texas Lawyer on the Rise” ","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2020"},{"title":"“Up-and-Coming 100: Texas Rising Stars”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2019–2021"},{"title":"“Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2016–2024"},{"title":"Order of the Chancellors","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"},{"title":"Order of the Barristers","detail":"University of Texas School of Law"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13343}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-03T16:04:53.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T16:04:53.000Z","searchable_text":"Mann{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as “Up and Coming” and Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2024-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized within the “Top 50” in Patent Litigation Report\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Patexia, 2024–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked by IAM Patent 1000\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation – Intellectual Property\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation – Patent\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Intellectual Property Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch in America, 2021–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Green 500: Leading Environmental Lawyers”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2023–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Future Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2021–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Texas Lawyer on the Rise” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyer, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Up-and-Coming 100: Texas Rising Stars”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2019–2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Rising Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2016–2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Order of the Chancellors\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"University of Texas School of Law\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Order of the Coif\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"University of Texas School of Law\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Order of the Barristers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"University of Texas School of Law\"}{{ FIELD }}Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation{{ FIELD }}Halliburton v. U.S. Well Services (W.D. Tex.) As trial counsel, prevailed for U.S. Well Services in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that U.S. Well Services infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of U.S. Well Services’ fracturing sites—a win that Am Law recognized with a “Litigator of the Week” first-runner-up nod. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Halliburton’s technical experts.{{ FIELD }}In the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (ITC) Served as trial counsel to defend Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) in a massive ITC action brought against AMD by its competitor Realtek Semiconductor Corp. Realtek accused AMD of infringing three patents relating to integrated circuit designs. AMD faced an exclusion order and a cease-and-desist order at the ITC. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron Elliot’s decision found that all asserted claims of two of the patents were invalid for multiple reasons. For the third patent, he ruled that all asserted claims were not infringed by AMD, and that all but one of those claims were also invalid. Rex conducted multiple cross-examinations and direct examinations of expert witnesses and fact witnesses in the five-day trial.{{ FIELD }}Flypsi, Inc. v. Google, LLC (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for plaintiff Flypsi, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google’s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flypsi’s invention, the jury rejected Google’s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flypsi US$12 million for Google’s infringement. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Google’s expert and company representative at trial.{{ FIELD }}TMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. Rex conducted a key cross-examination of the inventor and put on Medtronic’s noninfringement and invalidity expert. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Rex and his team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.{{ FIELD }}Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial.{{ FIELD }}Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Lead counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.{{ FIELD }}Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Lead trial counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.{{ FIELD }}Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.{{ FIELD }}Tech Pharmacy Services, LLC v. Alixa Rx LLC et al. (E.D. Tex.) Served as counsel for defendants and obtained a defense verdict in jury trial on claims of trade secret misappropriation, fraud, and patent infringement.{{ FIELD }}Ceats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly US$300 million for the defendants.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation and Other Matters{{ FIELD }}Unbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing that Rex led, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award.{{ FIELD }}Smith v. LifeVantage Corporation et al. (D. Utah) Counsel for defendant LifeVantage in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, antitrust violations, securities laws violations, and unjust enrichment. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won a motion to dismiss on several of the claims, and the case proceeded through class discovery on remaining claims, where the team prevailed for LifeVantage in achieving denial of class certification. The case settled shortly after class certification was denied.{{ FIELD }}Confidential AAA Arbitration in Dallas. Trial counsel for respondent in a confidential arbitration brought by a plaintiff CEO with breach of contract claims close to US$10 million. After a multiday evidentiary hearing where Rex put on a key witness for the company, Rex and the Winston team achieved a complete defense victory and an award of attorneys’ fees against the claimant.{{ FIELD }}Confidential JAMS Arbitration in San Francisco. Lead trial counsel for then-NFL player in a JAMS arbitration wherein a marketing agency filed for arbitration against the NFL player for breach of contract alleging millions of dollars in damages. Brought counterclaims on behalf of the NFL player for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract, among others. Achieved a settlement prior to the evidentiary hearing whereby the marketing agency, despite being the initial plaintiff/claimant, actually paid the client a six-figure payment.{{ FIELD }}Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.{{ FIELD }}United States of America ex. rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.{{ FIELD }}Waterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC (Texas State Court) Represented developer of a billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.{{ FIELD }}Fee Smith Sharp \u0026amp; Vitullo LLP et al. v. Deana Strunk et al. (Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct.) Trial counsel for defendant in a breach of contract action seeking close to US$10 million in damages. After successfully defeating a motion to compel arbitration through the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and completing discovery, the case settled on the eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}In re Woodbridge Investments Litigation (C.D. Cal.) Counsel for defendant in a class action proceeding brought against the bank for aiding and abetting fraud claims, among others, relating to the Woodbridge billion-dollar Ponzi scheme. Case settled after class certification briefing.{{ FIELD }}Prophet Equity LP et al. v. Twin City Insurance Company (5th Cir.) Counsel for appellant wherein a reversal was achieved of a summary judgment ruling against client on contractual insurance issues. The case settled shortly after the decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.{{ FIELD }}Crothers et al. v. Teton County Board of County Commissioners et al. (D. Wyo.) Trial counsel for plaintiffs in an action alleging multiple constitutional violations by various law enforcement officials and agencies in the Teton County area. Also served as appellate counsel for a related criminal proceeding wherein an appeal was sought for various Brady violations, and argued at the court, along with co-counsel Alan Dershowitz, in the post-trial and appellate phase.{{ FIELD }}Rysher Entertainment et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc. (L.A. Cnty. Super. Ct., Cal.) Represented Rysher Entertainment, 2929 Entertainment, and Qualia Capital as plaintiffs in a contractual indemnification case arising out of underlying litigation brought by actor Don Johnson related to the television series Nash Bridges. Obtained summary judgment from the trial court holding that Cox was liable under the contract, and the case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.{{ FIELD }}Sabre Corporation, et al. v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al. (N.Y. Com. Div.) Represented Sabre and related entities in an insurance coverage case against two insurance companies relating to the insurers’ failure to indemnify Sabre in a major piece of litigation. Obtained summary judgment at the trial court level declaring that the insurers had a duty to defend Sabre, and a disqualifying conflict of interest prevented insurers from controlling the defense. The case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.{{ FIELD }}Rex Mann is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on patent litigation and other complex commercial litigation matters. Although his patent litigation practice is nationwide, he has extensive experience specifically in patent-heavy districts, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. On commercial matters he often represents technology companies or works on matters involving complex technology, and his background in engineering enables him to deeply understand clients’ technologies and businesses to help them better achieve their goals. Rex’s work continues to garner him honors from legal publications such as The Best Lawyers in America®, IAM Patent 1000, Lawdragon, and Benchmark Litigation.\nRex’s intellectual property practice primarily consists of complex patent and trade secret litigation. He has handled bet-the-company patent and trade secret matters, including taking them to trial, and winning. Outside of litigation, he advises his clients on technology licensing issues, policies relating to intellectual property, and targeted patent prosecution advice relating to licensing and litigation.\n“Rex’s patent litigation practice is heavily concentrated on matters arising in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. In fact, he began his legal career as a law clerk for the Honorable T. John Ward in the Eastern District of Texas, where he gained significant experience in federal trial practice and patent litigation, given the district’s intense patent trial docket.\nRex has significant trial experience and has tried more than 20 cases or arbitrations as first chair or in an otherwise stand-up role, and he has experience in all phases of trial. In addition to his civil trial work, Rex spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where he tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict and obtained a guilty verdict in each one.\nRex’s commercial litigation practice has included a wide variety of matters, including breach of contract, business torts, consumer class actions, RICO violations, securities laws violations, whistleblower or False Claims Act litigation, employment, fraud, suits against the government or government officials, and other related disputes. Given his background in engineering, the work Rex does for his commercial clients often involves technology issues. Moreover, his undergraduate and graduate degrees in civil and environmental engineering are helpful when working on matters in the environmental and oil and gas industries. Partner Recognized as “Up and Coming” and Ranked for Intellectual Property – Texas Chambers USA, 2024-2025 Recognized within the “Top 50” in Patent Litigation Report Patexia, 2024–2025 Ranked by IAM Patent 1000 2025 Litigation – Intellectual Property The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2026 Litigation – Patent The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026 Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Intellectual Property Law Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch in America, 2021–2023 “Green 500: Leading Environmental Lawyers” Lawdragon, 2023–2025 “Future Star” Benchmark Litigation US, 2021–2026 “Texas Lawyer on the Rise”  Texas Lawyer, 2020 “Up-and-Coming 100: Texas Rising Stars” Super Lawyers, 2019–2021 “Rising Star” Super Lawyers, 2016–2024 Order of the Chancellors University of Texas School of Law Order of the Coif University of Texas School of Law Order of the Barristers University of Texas School of Law Texas A\u0026amp;M University Texas A\u0026amp;M School of Law The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law Texas A\u0026amp;M University Texas A\u0026amp;M School of Law Texas Board of Trustees, Dallas Children’s Advocacy Center, 2016–2022 Board Member, Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, 2017–2018 District 6 Grievance Committee Member, State Bar of Texas, 2015–2018 Co-Chair of the Judiciary Committee, Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, 2015–2017 Co-Chair of the Business and Career Development Committee, Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, 2015–2016 Law Clerk, Honorable T. John Ward, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation Halliburton v. U.S. Well Services (W.D. Tex.) As trial counsel, prevailed for U.S. Well Services in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that U.S. Well Services infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of U.S. Well Services’ fracturing sites—a win that Am Law recognized with a “Litigator of the Week” first-runner-up nod. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Halliburton’s technical experts. In the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (ITC) Served as trial counsel to defend Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) in a massive ITC action brought against AMD by its competitor Realtek Semiconductor Corp. Realtek accused AMD of infringing three patents relating to integrated circuit designs. AMD faced an exclusion order and a cease-and-desist order at the ITC. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron Elliot’s decision found that all asserted claims of two of the patents were invalid for multiple reasons. For the third patent, he ruled that all asserted claims were not infringed by AMD, and that all but one of those claims were also invalid. Rex conducted multiple cross-examinations and direct examinations of expert witnesses and fact witnesses in the five-day trial. Flypsi, Inc. v. Google, LLC (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for plaintiff Flypsi, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google’s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flypsi’s invention, the jury rejected Google’s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flypsi US$12 million for Google’s infringement. Rex conducted key cross-examinations of Google’s expert and company representative at trial. TMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. Rex conducted a key cross-examination of the inventor and put on Medtronic’s noninfringement and invalidity expert. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Rex and his team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement. Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial. Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Lead counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled. Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Lead trial counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva. Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution. Tech Pharmacy Services, LLC v. Alixa Rx LLC et al. (E.D. Tex.) Served as counsel for defendants and obtained a defense verdict in jury trial on claims of trade secret misappropriation, fraud, and patent infringement. Ceats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly US$300 million for the defendants. Commercial Litigation and Other Matters Unbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing that Rex led, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award. Smith v. LifeVantage Corporation et al. (D. Utah) Counsel for defendant LifeVantage in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, antitrust violations, securities laws violations, and unjust enrichment. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won a motion to dismiss on several of the claims, and the case proceeded through class discovery on remaining claims, where the team prevailed for LifeVantage in achieving denial of class certification. The case settled shortly after class certification was denied. Confidential AAA Arbitration in Dallas. Trial counsel for respondent in a confidential arbitration brought by a plaintiff CEO with breach of contract claims close to US$10 million. After a multiday evidentiary hearing where Rex put on a key witness for the company, Rex and the Winston team achieved a complete defense victory and an award of attorneys’ fees against the claimant. Confidential JAMS Arbitration in San Francisco. Lead trial counsel for then-NFL player in a JAMS arbitration wherein a marketing agency filed for arbitration against the NFL player for breach of contract alleging millions of dollars in damages. Brought counterclaims on behalf of the NFL player for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract, among others. Achieved a settlement prior to the evidentiary hearing whereby the marketing agency, despite being the initial plaintiff/claimant, actually paid the client a six-figure payment. Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery. United States of America ex. rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. (E.D. Tex.) Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act. Waterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC (Texas State Court) Represented developer of a billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer. Fee Smith Sharp \u0026amp; Vitullo LLP et al. v. Deana Strunk et al. (Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct.) Trial counsel for defendant in a breach of contract action seeking close to US$10 million in damages. After successfully defeating a motion to compel arbitration through the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and completing discovery, the case settled on the eve of trial. In re Woodbridge Investments Litigation (C.D. Cal.) Counsel for defendant in a class action proceeding brought against the bank for aiding and abetting fraud claims, among others, relating to the Woodbridge billion-dollar Ponzi scheme. Case settled after class certification briefing. Prophet Equity LP et al. v. Twin City Insurance Company (5th Cir.) Counsel for appellant wherein a reversal was achieved of a summary judgment ruling against client on contractual insurance issues. The case settled shortly after the decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Crothers et al. v. Teton County Board of County Commissioners et al. (D. Wyo.) Trial counsel for plaintiffs in an action alleging multiple constitutional violations by various law enforcement officials and agencies in the Teton County area. Also served as appellate counsel for a related criminal proceeding wherein an appeal was sought for various Brady violations, and argued at the court, along with co-counsel Alan Dershowitz, in the post-trial and appellate phase. Rysher Entertainment et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc. (L.A. Cnty. Super. Ct., Cal.) Represented Rysher Entertainment, 2929 Entertainment, and Qualia Capital as plaintiffs in a contractual indemnification case arising out of underlying litigation brought by actor Don Johnson related to the television series Nash Bridges. Obtained summary judgment from the trial court holding that Cox was liable under the contract, and the case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages. Sabre Corporation, et al. v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al. (N.Y. Com. Div.) Represented Sabre and related entities in an insurance coverage case against two insurance companies relating to the insurers’ failure to indemnify Sabre in a major piece of litigation. Obtained summary judgment at the trial court level declaring that the insurers had a duty to defend Sabre, and a disqualifying conflict of interest prevented insurers from controlling the defense. The case settled shortly before a scheduled trial on damages.","searchable_name":"Rex A. Mann","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":176,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":445596,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7305,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eTom Melsheimer is the firm\u0026rsquo;s Global Head of Trial and serves as the Managing Partner of the Dallas office. Described as \u0026ldquo;one of the most sought after trial lawyers in the country\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAmerican Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003epublishers, \u0026ldquo;a celebrated storyteller\u0026rdquo; by the magazine\u0026rsquo;s founder, and a \u0026ldquo;game-changing ringer\u0026rdquo; by another national legal publication, Tom is the all-too-rare true trial lawyer\u0026mdash;one who can try any case, whatever the claims or subject matter. He has remarkably broad and comprehensive jury trial experience. He has tried civil cases involving breach of contract, business torts and fraud, trade secret, patent, antitrust, securities, product liability/mass tort, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;claims. He also has tried criminal cases involving antitrust, healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, and kidnapping. Tom is the author of a widely acclaimed book on trying cases before a jury,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOn the Jury Trial\u003c/em\u003e, now in its second edition. Legendary trial lawyer and law professor Mike Tigar has called it a \u0026ldquo;book every lawyer should read.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom is a fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, and he is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He has been recognized for his litigation prowess by numerous outside ranking organizations and publications, including \u003cem\u003eChambers USA, Chambers Global, Benchmark Litigation US, The Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;, Best Lawyers Texas, Lawdragon, Super Lawyers, \u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e The Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e. In August 2024, Tom was named as a finalist for \u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s 2024 National Winning Litigators award. In 2025, he made the inaugural list of \u003cem\u003eBloomberg\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Unrivaled\u0026rdquo; litigators series. Tom is one of a handful of trial lawyers in the country and the only one in Texas who has been recognized as \u0026ldquo;Band 1\u0026rdquo; by \u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e in five different categories including Commercial Litigation, White Collar, and Intellectual Property.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom tries lawsuits in state and federal courts before both judges and juries and involving civil claims and criminal charges. On the civil side, he has tried to verdict cases involving commercial, business tort, fraud, product liability, mass tort, securities, antitrust, patent infringement, trade secrets, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e/FCA claims. On the criminal side, he has tried to verdict cases involving healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, copyright infringement, aggravated sexual assault, and kidnapping. Tom\u0026rsquo;s jury trials include successfully representing plaintiffs and defendants all over the U.S. and throughout Texas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining private practice, Tom served as a federal prosecutor in Dallas. He successfully prosecuted the largest bank fraud case ever undertaken in Texas, and he obtained one of the largest RICO verdicts in Texas history. The Department of Justice honored Tom as one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s top prosecutors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMajor Cases: \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2025, Tom was lead counsel in the public corruption retrial of Dallas developer \u003cstrong\u003eRuel Hamilton\u003c/strong\u003e, who had previously been convicted and sentenced to seven years incarceration. In the retrial, following reversal of his earlier conviction, Tom obtained a complete acquittal on all charges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2023, Tom was lead trial counsel in defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAlphatec\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a bitter dispute with medical device rival Nuvasive, involving allegations that Alphatec tortiously interfered with NuVasive\u0026rsquo;s distributor agreements and that it also interfered with its agreements with sales representatives in certain states. In a nearly 3-month trial in California Superior Court in San Diego, he helped achieve a resounding victory by successfully defeating NuVasive Inc.\u0026rsquo;s $49 million actual damages claim (and multiples of that in alleged punitive damages).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn August 2023, Tom led a team that prevailed for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eU.S. Well Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(USWS) in patent infringement litigation brought by competitor Halliburton relating to hydraulic fracturing software and methods and physical systems related to the operation of USWS\u0026rsquo;s fracturing sites. Tom won a complete defense jury verdict finding of no infringement by the client and that two asserted patents were invalid. The verdict cleared USWS of Halliburton\u0026rsquo;s infringement allegations and damages demand of over $76 million.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2022, Tom represented \u003cstrong\u003eKent Thiry,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer CEO of Fortune 500 company DaVita, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in a first-of-its-kind criminal antitrust case alleging horizontal market allocation in the labor market. After an eight-day trial in federal court in Colorado, the jury acquitted Thiry on all counts. Many opined the win would influence whether the Department of Justice would continue to pursue enforcement allegations in antitrust matters involving labor-market collusion and, as it turns out, the DOJ has largely abandoned this theory of prosecution.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter a seven-week jury trial in 2019, for his client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDr. Nick Nicholson\u003c/strong\u003e, Tom successfully obtained the only acquittal in a 21-defendant federal healthcare fraud case involving allegations of $40 million in bribes and kickbacks. The so-called\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eForest Park\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;case was the largest healthcare fraud investigation ever undertaken by federal authorities in Texas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026nbsp;was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebillionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC. The jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court. Tom has represented Mr. Cuban, the Dallas Mavericks, and other Cuban business interests since 2000.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026nbsp;and co-counsel from the Texas Attorney General\u0026rsquo;s office helped the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eState of Texas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;secure\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ethe largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history\u003c/em\u003e. The $158 million settlement reached during trial followed claims of illegal marketing practices associated with the prescription drug Risperdal\u0026reg;.\u0026nbsp;His work in the case was featured in a 15-part series authored by acclaimed legal journalist Steven Brill and published by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHuffington Post\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2015.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026rsquo;s $178 million jury trial win on behalf of the plaintiff \u003cstrong\u003eMartin\u003c/strong\u003e in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMartin v. NL Industries, et al.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;included nearly $150 million in punitive damages. The jury award in the breach of fiduciary duty case was named one of the \u0026ldquo;Top Verdicts of 2009\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, in addition to being recognized as one of the year\u0026rsquo;s three largest verdicts in Texas and the year\u0026rsquo;s largest verdict in Dallas County. On four other occasions, Tom\u0026rsquo;s cases have been recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNLJ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;among the nation\u0026rsquo;s top cases, including the defense of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;action involving a government contract where his clients defeated a claim of fraudulent overpayment and won their affirmative claim that they had been underpaid.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn a mass tort case, Tom successfully defended a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sued by over 12,000 plaintiffs in state and federal multi-district litigation involving bet-the-company allegations that the client\u0026rsquo;s medical device was responsible for thousands of deaths and serious injuries. The first bellwether case in state court in Massachusetts\u0026nbsp;ended in a complete defense verdict after a high-profile jury trial, leading to the bulk of the cases settling thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"tom-melsheimer","email":"tmelsheimer@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalliburton v. U.S. Well Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) As lead trial counsel, prevailed for USWS in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which\u0026nbsp;claimed that USWS infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of UWS\u0026rsquo; fracturing sites.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. DaVita, Inc, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D. Colo.) Represented former DaVita CEO Kent Thiry as lead trial counsel in the defense of high-profile case involving novel Sherman Act conspiracy claims of horizontal market allocation in the labor market. Obtained complete defense verdict on all counts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn Re Fresenius Granuflo/Naturalyte Dialysate Product Liability\u0026nbsp;Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(MDL Mass.) Co-lead trial counsel in defense of 12,000+ individual product liability cases, in which the first bellwether trial ended in defense verdict and the vast bulk of cases settled thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Noryian\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel defending Dr. Leyla Nourian against charges related to an alleged healthcare fraud and money-laundering scheme involving compound pharmacies owned and operated by her family members. Just one week before a five-week trial, convinced the government to dismiss all charges against Dr. Nourian by submitting evidence that her signature had been forged on documents allegedly evidencing her involvement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eE.T.\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e et al. v. Morath, et al\u003c/em\u003e. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for group of children with disabilities challenging legality of Texas executive order banning mask mandates in public schools. After the district court denied emergency relief, all discovery and motion practice had to be condensed into just seven weeks. The bench trial resulted in the district court permanently enjoining enforcement of the executive order as violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act and preempted by federal law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFlypsi, Inc. d/b/a Flyp v. Google LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Flyp, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google\u0026rsquo;s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flyp\u0026rsquo;s invention, the jury rejected Google\u0026rsquo;s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flyp $12 million for Google\u0026rsquo;s infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Alan Andrew Beauchamp, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Dr. Nick Nicholson, a bariatric surgeon alleged to have participated in a conspiracy with other medical professionals and hospital administrators to receive $40 million in health care bribes and kickbacks.\u0026nbsp;After a seven-week trial with eight co-defendants, Nicholson was the lone defendant acquitted.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmerica\u0026rsquo;s Auto Auction v. Zoellner, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Oklahoma State Court) Trial counsel for plaintiff, a national auto auction company, in a case involving breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference claims, in which the jury found liability on all claims, awarded our client $2 million in actual damages, and found malice, after which the case settled during the punitive damages phase.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBadger Midstream Inc. v. Scout Energy LP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Texas State Court) Represented a pipeline owner as lead trial counsel in a contract dispute with a gas processing company, which favorably settled mid-trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eJohn Doe v. Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Confidential Arbitration) Represented consumer product company in employment dispute with former board chairman, which resolved after favorable arbitration award rejecting all claims and awarding attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSEC v. Mark Cuban\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban in a civil insider-trading case that, after a three-week trial, culminated in the jury returning a verdict for Mr. Cuban, clearing him of any wrongdoing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eState of Texas Ex Rel. Allen Jones v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for relator in Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act case that settled during trial for $158 million, making it the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history by nearly a factor of two.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWaterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented developer of billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCeats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly $300 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRysher Entertainment, LLC., et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles) Represented company owned by Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner in indemnity claim involving profit-sharing dispute with actor Don Johnson over television series \u0026ldquo;Nash Bridges,\u0026rdquo; in which the court granted summary judgment on liability in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor, and the case settled before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMartin v. NL Industries, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Martin, one of three minority shareholders, in breach of fiduciary duty and stockholder oppression case, in which the jury returned a verdict for $179 million that included in excess of $100 million in punitive damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalo Electronics Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D. Nev.) Lead trial counsel for Halo Electronics, a family-run business, in a long-running patent case related to packaging for surface-mount magnetic components used in electronics products, in which a jury found defendant Pulse Electronics liable for willful infringement on three Halo patents, confirmed the patents\u0026rsquo; validity, and awarded past damages. The case ended up in the United States Supreme Court, where the court vindicated Halo\u0026rsquo;s position on willfulness in patent litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eYETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in a case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement, which was resolved on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmerisourcebergen Specialty Group, Inc. v. FFF Enterprises, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Defended manufacturer of electronic medicine cabinet in patent infringement case brought by competitor; instituted IPR proceedings that resulted in a finding of invalidity of all asserted claim.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScript Security Solutions L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc., in patent infringement lawsuit that resolved on favorable terms on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. William Walters and Thomas Davis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) Represent Chairman of the Board of a public company in securities fraud litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc. v. Baxter Int\u0026rsquo;l, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Cal.) Co-lead trial counsel for Fresenius in a patent infringement case involving four patents relating to hemodialysis machines, in which a jury returned a verdict for Fresenius invalidating all asserted claims on all patents at trial (Baxter sought $87 million in damages and an injunction barring Fresenius from selling its \u0026ldquo;Fresenius 2008K\u0026rdquo; hemodialysis machine).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOasis Research, LLC v. Adrive LLC, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for EMC in RICO case arising out of allegations of witness bribery and obstruction of justice, which resolved on favorable terms prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States ex rel., Fisher, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for the relator in FCA litigation involving a federal program designed to assist homeowners following the 2008\u0026ndash;2009 financial crisis, which favorably settled on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eJudge Carlos Cortez v. Coyt Randal Johnston\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented defendant lawyer in defamation case brought by a sitting judge, which the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed and lost bid for re-election.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChevron Phillips Chemical Co. v. INEOS Group, Ltd.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Obtained temporary injunction against world\u0026rsquo;s third-largest chemical company in Texas state court, to prevent use and disclosure of trade secrets involving high-density polyethylene manufacturing technology. Suit arose from defendant\u0026rsquo;s licensing of confidential polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries, in contravention of licensing agreements. Injunction was affirmed on appeal by the Houston Court of Appeals. The case settled before trial but after the successful appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Ciba Vision Corporation, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Rembrandt in a patent infringement case involving extended wear contact lenses. Obtained $41 million jury verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDeep Nines, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Deep Nines on patent related to Internet security. Obtained jury verdict of $18 million for patentee; twice the damages sought.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHillwood Investment Properties Ltd. v. Radical Mavericks Management LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel for ownership of Dallas Mavericks basketball team in case alleging mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained summary dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSchroeder v. Wildenthal, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for a former Managing Partner of Akin Gump law firm in case alleging claims of conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty related to internationally famous art collection. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re 9/11 Terrorist Attacks\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel for Al Rajhi family members in multi-district litigation in largest wrongful death case ever brought in the U.S. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlcatel-Lucent Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D. Cal.) Trial counsel for Microsoft in a series of patent cases involving MP3, video compression, and other software technology. Obtained reversal in post-trial motion practice and appeal of what was then the largest patent jury verdict in history.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTexas Instruments v. Rajendra Talluri\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments (TI) in an inevitable disclosure/theft of trade secrets case. Obtained injunction for employer to prevent the inevitable disclosure of TI\u0026rsquo;s valuable trade secrets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEPG, Inc. v. Carreker, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D.N.J.) Lead trial counsel for Carreker in defense of trade secret case. Case settled after favorable trial verdict of no misappropriation of trade secrets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlcatel v. Samsung,\u003c/em\u003eDC-96-08262 (193rd\u0026nbsp;Dist. Ct., Dallas County, TX) Co-lead trial counsel for the plaintiff, a digital switch manufacturer, in a trade secret misappropriation case involving telecommunication technology in the largest trade secret case ever tried in Texas at the time, where damages sought were in excess of $500 million.\u0026nbsp;The case settled in the middle of trial on confidential terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAccolade Systems LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for Citrix in a patent infringement case. Obtained dismissal of all claims on eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCarreker Corp. v. Jack Cannon, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Carreker in an inevitable disclosure and misappropriation of trade secrets case involving a former senior principal. Obtained an injunction against employee under inevitable and actual disclosure theories.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTexas Instruments v. Gary Johnson\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments in inevitable disclosure of trade secrets case leading to one of the first such injunctions issued by a Texas court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRadman v. Weil Gotshal, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel for plaintiff in legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty case. Obtained multimillion-dollar settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUniversal Image, Inc. v. Cuban, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel in $1 billion contract and fraud case. Obtained dismissal of all claims prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTaco Bell Corp. v. John R. W. Cracken, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel in professional liability case on behalf of prominent attorney. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Lipscomb\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Co-lead counsel for defendant in public corruption case against prominent city councilman and civil rights leader. Home confinement obtained after trial; conviction reversed on appeal and case dismissed by government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBancTec USA, Inc. f/k/a Monitronics, Inc. v. Advanced Financial Solutions, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Advanced Financial Solutions; won judgment against BancTec in a countersuit for tortious interference with contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDSC Communications Corporation v. DGI Technologies, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for DSC in trade secrets case against competitor that induced DSC customers to disclose technology in breach of secrecy agreements involving Class IV tandem switch technology. Won $10 million judgment for DSC and developmental injunction and defeated antitrust counterclaims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S., ex rel. John D. Battaglia v. Texas Data Control, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Texas Data Control in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ecase alleging overbillings in violation of the federal FCA.\u0026nbsp;Defense verdict plus $15 million recovery on claim of under payment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Faulkner, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for the government in prosecution of bankers and developers in so-called I-30 condo case, which was largest bank fraud prosecution in Texas history. Obtained conviction of all defendants including RICO forfeiture.\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":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Melsheimer","nick_name":"Thomas","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Honorable Judge Homer Thornberry, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit","years_held":"1986 - 1986"}],"first_name":"Thomas","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":176,"law_schools":[{"id":2055,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1986-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Lawyer of the Year” – Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"“Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2019 – 2026"},{"title":"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”","detail":"D CEO Magazine, 2026-2026"},{"title":"IAM Global Leader","detail":"IAM, 2021-2026"},{"title":"Recognized in 8 categories: Antitrust, Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, Litigation – Securities, Qui Tam Law","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2007-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2007-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: General Commercial – Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds","detail":"Chambers USA, 2020-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 3 – Intellectual Property – Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA, 2020-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: Trial Lawyers, USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2019-2025"},{"title":"Band 3 – Intellectual Property: Patent, USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” in Intellectual Property: Patents: Litigation","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” in General Commercial Disputes","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Leading Trial Lawyer”","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Inducted into the 2024 Lawdragon “Hall of Fame”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2024"},{"title":"“100 Managing Partners you Need to Know” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Trial Law”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022-2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Environmental Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Energy Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Global Litigators” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Global IP Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Super Lawyers, Texas","detail":"2003-2025"},{"title":"“Trials MVP”","detail":"Law360, 2024-2025"},{"title":"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”","detail":"D CEO Magazine, 2016–2023"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Hall of Fame” ","detail":"D Magazine, 2022"},{"title":"“Global Leader” for Commercial Litigation and IP–Patents","detail":"Who’s Who Legal, 2022"},{"title":"Patents Leader","detail":"WIPR Leaders, 2021, 2024"},{"title":"Lifetime Achievement Award","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2021"},{"title":"Texas Trailblazers","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2019"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/tommelsheimer/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eTom Melsheimer is the firm\u0026rsquo;s Global Head of Trial and serves as the Managing Partner of the Dallas office. Described as \u0026ldquo;one of the most sought after trial lawyers in the country\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAmerican Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003epublishers, \u0026ldquo;a celebrated storyteller\u0026rdquo; by the magazine\u0026rsquo;s founder, and a \u0026ldquo;game-changing ringer\u0026rdquo; by another national legal publication, Tom is the all-too-rare true trial lawyer\u0026mdash;one who can try any case, whatever the claims or subject matter. He has remarkably broad and comprehensive jury trial experience. He has tried civil cases involving breach of contract, business torts and fraud, trade secret, patent, antitrust, securities, product liability/mass tort, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;claims. He also has tried criminal cases involving antitrust, healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, and kidnapping. Tom is the author of a widely acclaimed book on trying cases before a jury,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOn the Jury Trial\u003c/em\u003e, now in its second edition. Legendary trial lawyer and law professor Mike Tigar has called it a \u0026ldquo;book every lawyer should read.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom is a fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, and he is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He has been recognized for his litigation prowess by numerous outside ranking organizations and publications, including \u003cem\u003eChambers USA, Chambers Global, Benchmark Litigation US, The Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;, Best Lawyers Texas, Lawdragon, Super Lawyers, \u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e The Legal 500 US\u003c/em\u003e. In August 2024, Tom was named as a finalist for \u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s 2024 National Winning Litigators award. In 2025, he made the inaugural list of \u003cem\u003eBloomberg\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Unrivaled\u0026rdquo; litigators series. Tom is one of a handful of trial lawyers in the country and the only one in Texas who has been recognized as \u0026ldquo;Band 1\u0026rdquo; by \u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e in five different categories including Commercial Litigation, White Collar, and Intellectual Property.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom tries lawsuits in state and federal courts before both judges and juries and involving civil claims and criminal charges. On the civil side, he has tried to verdict cases involving commercial, business tort, fraud, product liability, mass tort, securities, antitrust, patent infringement, trade secrets, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e/FCA claims. On the criminal side, he has tried to verdict cases involving healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, copyright infringement, aggravated sexual assault, and kidnapping. Tom\u0026rsquo;s jury trials include successfully representing plaintiffs and defendants all over the U.S. and throughout Texas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining private practice, Tom served as a federal prosecutor in Dallas. He successfully prosecuted the largest bank fraud case ever undertaken in Texas, and he obtained one of the largest RICO verdicts in Texas history. The Department of Justice honored Tom as one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s top prosecutors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMajor Cases: \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2025, Tom was lead counsel in the public corruption retrial of Dallas developer \u003cstrong\u003eRuel Hamilton\u003c/strong\u003e, who had previously been convicted and sentenced to seven years incarceration. In the retrial, following reversal of his earlier conviction, Tom obtained a complete acquittal on all charges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2023, Tom was lead trial counsel in defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAlphatec\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a bitter dispute with medical device rival Nuvasive, involving allegations that Alphatec tortiously interfered with NuVasive\u0026rsquo;s distributor agreements and that it also interfered with its agreements with sales representatives in certain states. In a nearly 3-month trial in California Superior Court in San Diego, he helped achieve a resounding victory by successfully defeating NuVasive Inc.\u0026rsquo;s $49 million actual damages claim (and multiples of that in alleged punitive damages).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn August 2023, Tom led a team that prevailed for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eU.S. Well Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(USWS) in patent infringement litigation brought by competitor Halliburton relating to hydraulic fracturing software and methods and physical systems related to the operation of USWS\u0026rsquo;s fracturing sites. Tom won a complete defense jury verdict finding of no infringement by the client and that two asserted patents were invalid. The verdict cleared USWS of Halliburton\u0026rsquo;s infringement allegations and damages demand of over $76 million.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2022, Tom represented \u003cstrong\u003eKent Thiry,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer CEO of Fortune 500 company DaVita, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in a first-of-its-kind criminal antitrust case alleging horizontal market allocation in the labor market. After an eight-day trial in federal court in Colorado, the jury acquitted Thiry on all counts. Many opined the win would influence whether the Department of Justice would continue to pursue enforcement allegations in antitrust matters involving labor-market collusion and, as it turns out, the DOJ has largely abandoned this theory of prosecution.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter a seven-week jury trial in 2019, for his client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDr. Nick Nicholson\u003c/strong\u003e, Tom successfully obtained the only acquittal in a 21-defendant federal healthcare fraud case involving allegations of $40 million in bribes and kickbacks. The so-called\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eForest Park\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;case was the largest healthcare fraud investigation ever undertaken by federal authorities in Texas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026nbsp;was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebillionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC. The jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court. Tom has represented Mr. Cuban, the Dallas Mavericks, and other Cuban business interests since 2000.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026nbsp;and co-counsel from the Texas Attorney General\u0026rsquo;s office helped the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eState of Texas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;secure\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ethe largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history\u003c/em\u003e. The $158 million settlement reached during trial followed claims of illegal marketing practices associated with the prescription drug Risperdal\u0026reg;.\u0026nbsp;His work in the case was featured in a 15-part series authored by acclaimed legal journalist Steven Brill and published by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHuffington Post\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2015.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom\u0026rsquo;s $178 million jury trial win on behalf of the plaintiff \u003cstrong\u003eMartin\u003c/strong\u003e in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMartin v. NL Industries, et al.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;included nearly $150 million in punitive damages. The jury award in the breach of fiduciary duty case was named one of the \u0026ldquo;Top Verdicts of 2009\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, in addition to being recognized as one of the year\u0026rsquo;s three largest verdicts in Texas and the year\u0026rsquo;s largest verdict in Dallas County. On four other occasions, Tom\u0026rsquo;s cases have been recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNLJ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;among the nation\u0026rsquo;s top cases, including the defense of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;action involving a government contract where his clients defeated a claim of fraudulent overpayment and won their affirmative claim that they had been underpaid.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn a mass tort case, Tom successfully defended a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sued by over 12,000 plaintiffs in state and federal multi-district litigation involving bet-the-company allegations that the client\u0026rsquo;s medical device was responsible for thousands of deaths and serious injuries. The first bellwether case in state court in Massachusetts\u0026nbsp;ended in a complete defense verdict after a high-profile jury trial, leading to the bulk of the cases settling thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalliburton v. U.S. Well Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) As lead trial counsel, prevailed for USWS in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which\u0026nbsp;claimed that USWS infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of UWS\u0026rsquo; fracturing sites.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. DaVita, Inc, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D. Colo.) Represented former DaVita CEO Kent Thiry as lead trial counsel in the defense of high-profile case involving novel Sherman Act conspiracy claims of horizontal market allocation in the labor market. Obtained complete defense verdict on all counts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn Re Fresenius Granuflo/Naturalyte Dialysate Product Liability\u0026nbsp;Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(MDL Mass.) Co-lead trial counsel in defense of 12,000+ individual product liability cases, in which the first bellwether trial ended in defense verdict and the vast bulk of cases settled thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Noryian\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel defending Dr. Leyla Nourian against charges related to an alleged healthcare fraud and money-laundering scheme involving compound pharmacies owned and operated by her family members. Just one week before a five-week trial, convinced the government to dismiss all charges against Dr. Nourian by submitting evidence that her signature had been forged on documents allegedly evidencing her involvement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eE.T.\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e et al. v. Morath, et al\u003c/em\u003e. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for group of children with disabilities challenging legality of Texas executive order banning mask mandates in public schools. After the district court denied emergency relief, all discovery and motion practice had to be condensed into just seven weeks. The bench trial resulted in the district court permanently enjoining enforcement of the executive order as violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act and preempted by federal law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFlypsi, Inc. d/b/a Flyp v. Google LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Flyp, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google\u0026rsquo;s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flyp\u0026rsquo;s invention, the jury rejected Google\u0026rsquo;s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flyp $12 million for Google\u0026rsquo;s infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Alan Andrew Beauchamp, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Dr. Nick Nicholson, a bariatric surgeon alleged to have participated in a conspiracy with other medical professionals and hospital administrators to receive $40 million in health care bribes and kickbacks.\u0026nbsp;After a seven-week trial with eight co-defendants, Nicholson was the lone defendant acquitted.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmerica\u0026rsquo;s Auto Auction v. Zoellner, et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Oklahoma State Court) Trial counsel for plaintiff, a national auto auction company, in a case involving breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference claims, in which the jury found liability on all claims, awarded our client $2 million in actual damages, and found malice, after which the case settled during the punitive damages phase.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBadger Midstream Inc. v. Scout Energy LP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Texas State Court) Represented a pipeline owner as lead trial counsel in a contract dispute with a gas processing company, which favorably settled mid-trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eJohn Doe v. Company, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Confidential Arbitration) Represented consumer product company in employment dispute with former board chairman, which resolved after favorable arbitration award rejecting all claims and awarding attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSEC v. Mark Cuban\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban in a civil insider-trading case that, after a three-week trial, culminated in the jury returning a verdict for Mr. Cuban, clearing him of any wrongdoing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eState of Texas Ex Rel. Allen Jones v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for relator in Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act case that settled during trial for $158 million, making it the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history by nearly a factor of two.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWaterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented developer of billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCeats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly $300 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRysher Entertainment, LLC., et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles) Represented company owned by Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner in indemnity claim involving profit-sharing dispute with actor Don Johnson over television series \u0026ldquo;Nash Bridges,\u0026rdquo; in which the court granted summary judgment on liability in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor, and the case settled before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMartin v. NL Industries, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Martin, one of three minority shareholders, in breach of fiduciary duty and stockholder oppression case, in which the jury returned a verdict for $179 million that included in excess of $100 million in punitive damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHalo Electronics Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D. Nev.) Lead trial counsel for Halo Electronics, a family-run business, in a long-running patent case related to packaging for surface-mount magnetic components used in electronics products, in which a jury found defendant Pulse Electronics liable for willful infringement on three Halo patents, confirmed the patents\u0026rsquo; validity, and awarded past damages. The case ended up in the United States Supreme Court, where the court vindicated Halo\u0026rsquo;s position on willfulness in patent litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eYETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in a case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement, which was resolved on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmerisourcebergen Specialty Group, Inc. v. FFF Enterprises, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Defended manufacturer of electronic medicine cabinet in patent infringement case brought by competitor; instituted IPR proceedings that resulted in a finding of invalidity of all asserted claim.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScript Security Solutions L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc., in patent infringement lawsuit that resolved on favorable terms on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. William Walters and Thomas Davis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) Represent Chairman of the Board of a public company in securities fraud litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc. v. Baxter Int\u0026rsquo;l, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Cal.) Co-lead trial counsel for Fresenius in a patent infringement case involving four patents relating to hemodialysis machines, in which a jury returned a verdict for Fresenius invalidating all asserted claims on all patents at trial (Baxter sought $87 million in damages and an injunction barring Fresenius from selling its \u0026ldquo;Fresenius 2008K\u0026rdquo; hemodialysis machine).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOasis Research, LLC v. Adrive LLC, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for EMC in RICO case arising out of allegations of witness bribery and obstruction of justice, which resolved on favorable terms prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States ex rel., Fisher, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for the relator in FCA litigation involving a federal program designed to assist homeowners following the 2008\u0026ndash;2009 financial crisis, which favorably settled on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eJudge Carlos Cortez v. Coyt Randal Johnston\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Represented defendant lawyer in defamation case brought by a sitting judge, which the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed and lost bid for re-election.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChevron Phillips Chemical Co. v. INEOS Group, Ltd.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Obtained temporary injunction against world\u0026rsquo;s third-largest chemical company in Texas state court, to prevent use and disclosure of trade secrets involving high-density polyethylene manufacturing technology. Suit arose from defendant\u0026rsquo;s licensing of confidential polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries, in contravention of licensing agreements. Injunction was affirmed on appeal by the Houston Court of Appeals. The case settled before trial but after the successful appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Ciba Vision Corporation, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Rembrandt in a patent infringement case involving extended wear contact lenses. Obtained $41 million jury verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDeep Nines, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Deep Nines on patent related to Internet security. Obtained jury verdict of $18 million for patentee; twice the damages sought.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHillwood Investment Properties Ltd. v. Radical Mavericks Management LLC\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel for ownership of Dallas Mavericks basketball team in case alleging mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained summary dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSchroeder v. Wildenthal, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for a former Managing Partner of Akin Gump law firm in case alleging claims of conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty related to internationally famous art collection. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re 9/11 Terrorist Attacks\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel for Al Rajhi family members in multi-district litigation in largest wrongful death case ever brought in the U.S. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlcatel-Lucent Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D. Cal.) Trial counsel for Microsoft in a series of patent cases involving MP3, video compression, and other software technology. Obtained reversal in post-trial motion practice and appeal of what was then the largest patent jury verdict in history.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTexas Instruments v. Rajendra Talluri\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments (TI) in an inevitable disclosure/theft of trade secrets case. Obtained injunction for employer to prevent the inevitable disclosure of TI\u0026rsquo;s valuable trade secrets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEPG, Inc. v. Carreker, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(D.N.J.) Lead trial counsel for Carreker in defense of trade secret case. Case settled after favorable trial verdict of no misappropriation of trade secrets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlcatel v. Samsung,\u003c/em\u003eDC-96-08262 (193rd\u0026nbsp;Dist. Ct., Dallas County, TX) Co-lead trial counsel for the plaintiff, a digital switch manufacturer, in a trade secret misappropriation case involving telecommunication technology in the largest trade secret case ever tried in Texas at the time, where damages sought were in excess of $500 million.\u0026nbsp;The case settled in the middle of trial on confidential terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAccolade Systems LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for Citrix in a patent infringement case. Obtained dismissal of all claims on eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCarreker Corp. v. Jack Cannon, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Carreker in an inevitable disclosure and misappropriation of trade secrets case involving a former senior principal. Obtained an injunction against employee under inevitable and actual disclosure theories.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTexas Instruments v. Gary Johnson\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments in inevitable disclosure of trade secrets case leading to one of the first such injunctions issued by a Texas court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRadman v. Weil Gotshal, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel for plaintiff in legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty case. Obtained multimillion-dollar settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUniversal Image, Inc. v. Cuban, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Texas State Court) Lead counsel in $1 billion contract and fraud case. Obtained dismissal of all claims prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTaco Bell Corp. v. John R. W. Cracken, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel in professional liability case on behalf of prominent attorney. Obtained dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Lipscomb\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Co-lead counsel for defendant in public corruption case against prominent city councilman and civil rights leader. Home confinement obtained after trial; conviction reversed on appeal and case dismissed by government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBancTec USA, Inc. f/k/a Monitronics, Inc. v. Advanced Financial Solutions, Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Advanced Financial Solutions; won judgment against BancTec in a countersuit for tortious interference with contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDSC Communications Corporation v. DGI Technologies, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for DSC in trade secrets case against competitor that induced DSC customers to disclose technology in breach of secrecy agreements involving Class IV tandem switch technology. Won $10 million judgment for DSC and developmental injunction and defeated antitrust counterclaims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S., ex rel. John D. Battaglia v. Texas Data Control, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Texas Data Control in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ecase alleging overbillings in violation of the federal FCA.\u0026nbsp;Defense verdict plus $15 million recovery on claim of under payment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. Faulkner, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for the government in prosecution of bankers and developers in so-called I-30 condo case, which was largest bank fraud prosecution in Texas history. Obtained conviction of all defendants including RICO forfeiture.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“Lawyer of the Year” – Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"“Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation US, 2019 – 2026"},{"title":"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”","detail":"D CEO Magazine, 2026-2026"},{"title":"IAM Global Leader","detail":"IAM, 2021-2026"},{"title":"Recognized in 8 categories: Antitrust, Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, Litigation – Securities, Qui Tam Law","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2007-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Intellectual Property – Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2007-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: General Commercial – Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds","detail":"Chambers USA, 2020-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations","detail":"Chambers USA, 2018-2025"},{"title":"Band 3 – Intellectual Property – Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA, 2020-2025"},{"title":"Band 1 – Litigation: Trial Lawyers, USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2019-2025"},{"title":"Band 3 – Intellectual Property: Patent, USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” in Intellectual Property: Patents: Litigation","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Key Lawyer” in General Commercial Disputes","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025"},{"title":"“Leading Trial Lawyer”","detail":"The Legal 500 US, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Inducted into the 2024 Lawdragon “Hall of Fame”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2024"},{"title":"“100 Managing Partners you Need to Know” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Trial Law”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022-2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Environmental Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Energy Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Global Litigators” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Leading Global IP Lawyers” ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Super Lawyers, Texas","detail":"2003-2025"},{"title":"“Trials MVP”","detail":"Law360, 2024-2025"},{"title":"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”","detail":"D CEO Magazine, 2016–2023"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Hall of Fame” ","detail":"D Magazine, 2022"},{"title":"“Global Leader” for Commercial Litigation and IP–Patents","detail":"Who’s Who Legal, 2022"},{"title":"Patents Leader","detail":"WIPR Leaders, 2021, 2024"},{"title":"Lifetime Achievement Award","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2021"},{"title":"Texas Trailblazers","detail":"Texas Lawyer, 2019"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13340}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-04T22:05:21.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-04T22:05:21.000Z","searchable_text":"Melsheimer{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Lawyer of the Year” – Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation US, 2019 – 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D CEO Magazine, 2026-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"IAM Global Leader\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"IAM, 2021-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized in 8 categories: Antitrust, Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, Litigation – Securities, Qui Tam Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2007-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Nationwide\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Intellectual Property – Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2007-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Litigation: General Commercial – Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2020-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 3 – Intellectual Property – Nationwide\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2020-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 – Litigation: Trial Lawyers, USA\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global, 2019-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 3 – Intellectual Property: Patent, USA\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Key Lawyer” in Intellectual Property: Patents: Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Key Lawyer” in General Commercial Disputes\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Leading Trial Lawyer”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US, 2023-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Inducted into the 2024 Lawdragon “Hall of Fame”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“100 Managing Partners you Need to Know” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Litigators in America – Trial Law”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2023-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Environmental Lawyers” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Energy Lawyers” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Global Litigators” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Global IP Lawyers” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2003-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Trials MVP”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2024-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D CEO Magazine, 2016–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Best Lawyers Hall of Fame” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D Magazine, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Global Leader” for Commercial Litigation and IP–Patents\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Patents Leader\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"WIPR Leaders, 2021, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Lifetime Achievement Award\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyer, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Texas Trailblazers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Lawyer, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}Halliburton v. U.S. Well Services (W.D. Tex.) As lead trial counsel, prevailed for USWS in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that USWS infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of UWS’ fracturing sites.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. DaVita, Inc, et al. (D. Colo.) Represented former DaVita CEO Kent Thiry as lead trial counsel in the defense of high-profile case involving novel Sherman Act conspiracy claims of horizontal market allocation in the labor market. Obtained complete defense verdict on all counts.{{ FIELD }}In Re Fresenius Granuflo/Naturalyte Dialysate Product Liability Litigation (MDL Mass.) Co-lead trial counsel in defense of 12,000+ individual product liability cases, in which the first bellwether trial ended in defense verdict and the vast bulk of cases settled thereafter.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. Noryian (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel defending Dr. Leyla Nourian against charges related to an alleged healthcare fraud and money-laundering scheme involving compound pharmacies owned and operated by her family members. Just one week before a five-week trial, convinced the government to dismiss all charges against Dr. Nourian by submitting evidence that her signature had been forged on documents allegedly evidencing her involvement.{{ FIELD }}E.T., et al. v. Morath, et al. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for group of children with disabilities challenging legality of Texas executive order banning mask mandates in public schools. After the district court denied emergency relief, all discovery and motion practice had to be condensed into just seven weeks. The bench trial resulted in the district court permanently enjoining enforcement of the executive order as violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act and preempted by federal law.{{ FIELD }}Flypsi, Inc. d/b/a Flyp v. Google LLC (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Flyp, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google’s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flyp’s invention, the jury rejected Google’s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flyp $12 million for Google’s infringement.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. Alan Andrew Beauchamp, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Dr. Nick Nicholson, a bariatric surgeon alleged to have participated in a conspiracy with other medical professionals and hospital administrators to receive $40 million in health care bribes and kickbacks. After a seven-week trial with eight co-defendants, Nicholson was the lone defendant acquitted.{{ FIELD }}America’s Auto Auction v. Zoellner, et al. (Oklahoma State Court) Trial counsel for plaintiff, a national auto auction company, in a case involving breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference claims, in which the jury found liability on all claims, awarded our client $2 million in actual damages, and found malice, after which the case settled during the punitive damages phase.{{ FIELD }}Badger Midstream Inc. v. Scout Energy LP (Texas State Court) Represented a pipeline owner as lead trial counsel in a contract dispute with a gas processing company, which favorably settled mid-trial.{{ FIELD }}John Doe v. Company, Inc. (Confidential Arbitration) Represented consumer product company in employment dispute with former board chairman, which resolved after favorable arbitration award rejecting all claims and awarding attorney’s fees to company.{{ FIELD }}Tech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud.{{ FIELD }}SEC v. Mark Cuban (N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban in a civil insider-trading case that, after a three-week trial, culminated in the jury returning a verdict for Mr. Cuban, clearing him of any wrongdoing.{{ FIELD }}State of Texas Ex Rel. Allen Jones v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for relator in Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act case that settled during trial for $158 million, making it the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history by nearly a factor of two.{{ FIELD }}Waterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC (Texas State Court) Represented developer of billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer.{{ FIELD }}Ceats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly $300 million.{{ FIELD }}Rysher Entertainment, LLC., et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc., et al. (Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles) Represented company owned by Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner in indemnity claim involving profit-sharing dispute with actor Don Johnson over television series “Nash Bridges,” in which the court granted summary judgment on liability in our client’s favor, and the case settled before trial.{{ FIELD }}Martin v. NL Industries, Inc., et al. (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Martin, one of three minority shareholders, in breach of fiduciary duty and stockholder oppression case, in which the jury returned a verdict for $179 million that included in excess of $100 million in punitive damages.{{ FIELD }}Halo Electronics Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., et al. (D. Nev.) Lead trial counsel for Halo Electronics, a family-run business, in a long-running patent case related to packaging for surface-mount magnetic components used in electronics products, in which a jury found defendant Pulse Electronics liable for willful infringement on three Halo patents, confirmed the patents’ validity, and awarded past damages. The case ended up in the United States Supreme Court, where the court vindicated Halo’s position on willfulness in patent litigation.{{ FIELD }}YETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in a case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement, which was resolved on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Amerisourcebergen Specialty Group, Inc. v. FFF Enterprises, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Defended manufacturer of electronic medicine cabinet in patent infringement case brought by competitor; instituted IPR proceedings that resulted in a finding of invalidity of all asserted claim.{{ FIELD }}Script Security Solutions L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc., in patent infringement lawsuit that resolved on favorable terms on the eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. William Walters and Thomas Davis (S.D.N.Y.) Represent Chairman of the Board of a public company in securities fraud litigation.{{ FIELD }}Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Co-lead trial counsel for Fresenius in a patent infringement case involving four patents relating to hemodialysis machines, in which a jury returned a verdict for Fresenius invalidating all asserted claims on all patents at trial (Baxter sought $87 million in damages and an injunction barring Fresenius from selling its “Fresenius 2008K” hemodialysis machine).{{ FIELD }}Oasis Research, LLC v. Adrive LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for EMC in RICO case arising out of allegations of witness bribery and obstruction of justice, which resolved on favorable terms prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}United States ex rel., Fisher, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for the relator in FCA litigation involving a federal program designed to assist homeowners following the 2008–2009 financial crisis, which favorably settled on the eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}Judge Carlos Cortez v. Coyt Randal Johnston (Texas State Court) Represented defendant lawyer in defamation case brought by a sitting judge, which the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed and lost bid for re-election.{{ FIELD }}Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. v. INEOS Group, Ltd. (Texas State Court) Obtained temporary injunction against world’s third-largest chemical company in Texas state court, to prevent use and disclosure of trade secrets involving high-density polyethylene manufacturing technology. Suit arose from defendant’s licensing of confidential polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries, in contravention of licensing agreements. Injunction was affirmed on appeal by the Houston Court of Appeals. The case settled before trial but after the successful appeal.{{ FIELD }}Rembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Ciba Vision Corporation, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Rembrandt in a patent infringement case involving extended wear contact lenses. Obtained $41 million jury verdict.{{ FIELD }}Deep Nines, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Deep Nines on patent related to Internet security. Obtained jury verdict of $18 million for patentee; twice the damages sought.{{ FIELD }}Hillwood Investment Properties Ltd. v. Radical Mavericks Management LLC (Texas State Court) Lead counsel for ownership of Dallas Mavericks basketball team in case alleging mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained summary dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}Schroeder v. Wildenthal, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for a former Managing Partner of Akin Gump law firm in case alleging claims of conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty related to internationally famous art collection. Obtained dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}In re 9/11 Terrorist Attacks (S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel for Al Rajhi family members in multi-district litigation in largest wrongful death case ever brought in the U.S. Obtained dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}Alcatel-Lucent Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (S.D. Cal.) Trial counsel for Microsoft in a series of patent cases involving MP3, video compression, and other software technology. Obtained reversal in post-trial motion practice and appeal of what was then the largest patent jury verdict in history.{{ FIELD }}Texas Instruments v. Rajendra Talluri (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments (TI) in an inevitable disclosure/theft of trade secrets case. Obtained injunction for employer to prevent the inevitable disclosure of TI’s valuable trade secrets.{{ FIELD }}EPG, Inc. v. Carreker, Inc. (D.N.J.) Lead trial counsel for Carreker in defense of trade secret case. Case settled after favorable trial verdict of no misappropriation of trade secrets.{{ FIELD }}Alcatel v. Samsung,DC-96-08262 (193rd Dist. Ct., Dallas County, TX) Co-lead trial counsel for the plaintiff, a digital switch manufacturer, in a trade secret misappropriation case involving telecommunication technology in the largest trade secret case ever tried in Texas at the time, where damages sought were in excess of $500 million. The case settled in the middle of trial on confidential terms.{{ FIELD }}Accolade Systems LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for Citrix in a patent infringement case. Obtained dismissal of all claims on eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}Carreker Corp. v. Jack Cannon, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Carreker in an inevitable disclosure and misappropriation of trade secrets case involving a former senior principal. Obtained an injunction against employee under inevitable and actual disclosure theories.{{ FIELD }}Texas Instruments v. Gary Johnson (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments in inevitable disclosure of trade secrets case leading to one of the first such injunctions issued by a Texas court.{{ FIELD }}Radman v. Weil Gotshal, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead counsel for plaintiff in legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty case. Obtained multimillion-dollar settlement prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}Universal Image, Inc. v. Cuban, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead counsel in $1 billion contract and fraud case. Obtained dismissal of all claims prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}Taco Bell Corp. v. John R. W. Cracken, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel in professional liability case on behalf of prominent attorney. Obtained dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. Lipscomb (N.D. Tex.) Co-lead counsel for defendant in public corruption case against prominent city councilman and civil rights leader. Home confinement obtained after trial; conviction reversed on appeal and case dismissed by government.{{ FIELD }}BancTec USA, Inc. f/k/a Monitronics, Inc. v. Advanced Financial Solutions, Inc., et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Advanced Financial Solutions; won judgment against BancTec in a countersuit for tortious interference with contract.{{ FIELD }}DSC Communications Corporation v. DGI Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for DSC in trade secrets case against competitor that induced DSC customers to disclose technology in breach of secrecy agreements involving Class IV tandem switch technology. Won $10 million judgment for DSC and developmental injunction and defeated antitrust counterclaims.{{ FIELD }}U.S., ex rel. John D. Battaglia v. Texas Data Control, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Texas Data Control in qui tam case alleging overbillings in violation of the federal FCA. Defense verdict plus $15 million recovery on claim of under payment.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. Faulkner, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for the government in prosecution of bankers and developers in so-called I-30 condo case, which was largest bank fraud prosecution in Texas history. Obtained conviction of all defendants including RICO forfeiture.{{ FIELD }}Tom Melsheimer is the firm’s Global Head of Trial and serves as the Managing Partner of the Dallas office. Described as “one of the most sought after trial lawyers in the country” by American Lawyer’s publishers, “a celebrated storyteller” by the magazine’s founder, and a “game-changing ringer” by another national legal publication, Tom is the all-too-rare true trial lawyer—one who can try any case, whatever the claims or subject matter. He has remarkably broad and comprehensive jury trial experience. He has tried civil cases involving breach of contract, business torts and fraud, trade secret, patent, antitrust, securities, product liability/mass tort, and qui tam claims. He also has tried criminal cases involving antitrust, healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, and kidnapping. Tom is the author of a widely acclaimed book on trying cases before a jury, On the Jury Trial, now in its second edition. Legendary trial lawyer and law professor Mike Tigar has called it a “book every lawyer should read.” \nTom is a fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, and he is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He has been recognized for his litigation prowess by numerous outside ranking organizations and publications, including Chambers USA, Chambers Global, Benchmark Litigation US, The Best Lawyers in America®, Best Lawyers Texas, Lawdragon, Super Lawyers, and The Legal 500 US. In August 2024, Tom was named as a finalist for The National Law Journal’s 2024 National Winning Litigators award. In 2025, he made the inaugural list of Bloomberg’s “Unrivaled” litigators series. Tom is one of a handful of trial lawyers in the country and the only one in Texas who has been recognized as “Band 1” by Chambers in five different categories including Commercial Litigation, White Collar, and Intellectual Property.\nTom tries lawsuits in state and federal courts before both judges and juries and involving civil claims and criminal charges. On the civil side, he has tried to verdict cases involving commercial, business tort, fraud, product liability, mass tort, securities, antitrust, patent infringement, trade secrets, and qui tam/FCA claims. On the criminal side, he has tried to verdict cases involving healthcare fraud, bank fraud, public corruption, copyright infringement, aggravated sexual assault, and kidnapping. Tom’s jury trials include successfully representing plaintiffs and defendants all over the U.S. and throughout Texas.\nPrior to joining private practice, Tom served as a federal prosecutor in Dallas. He successfully prosecuted the largest bank fraud case ever undertaken in Texas, and he obtained one of the largest RICO verdicts in Texas history. The Department of Justice honored Tom as one of the nation’s top prosecutors.\nMajor Cases: \nIn 2025, Tom was lead counsel in the public corruption retrial of Dallas developer Ruel Hamilton, who had previously been convicted and sentenced to seven years incarceration. In the retrial, following reversal of his earlier conviction, Tom obtained a complete acquittal on all charges.\nIn 2023, Tom was lead trial counsel in defense of Alphatec in a bitter dispute with medical device rival Nuvasive, involving allegations that Alphatec tortiously interfered with NuVasive’s distributor agreements and that it also interfered with its agreements with sales representatives in certain states. In a nearly 3-month trial in California Superior Court in San Diego, he helped achieve a resounding victory by successfully defeating NuVasive Inc.’s $49 million actual damages claim (and multiples of that in alleged punitive damages).\nIn August 2023, Tom led a team that prevailed for U.S. Well Services (USWS) in patent infringement litigation brought by competitor Halliburton relating to hydraulic fracturing software and methods and physical systems related to the operation of USWS’s fracturing sites. Tom won a complete defense jury verdict finding of no infringement by the client and that two asserted patents were invalid. The verdict cleared USWS of Halliburton’s infringement allegations and damages demand of over $76 million.\nIn 2022, Tom represented Kent Thiry, former CEO of Fortune 500 company DaVita, Inc., in a first-of-its-kind criminal antitrust case alleging horizontal market allocation in the labor market. After an eight-day trial in federal court in Colorado, the jury acquitted Thiry on all counts. Many opined the win would influence whether the Department of Justice would continue to pursue enforcement allegations in antitrust matters involving labor-market collusion and, as it turns out, the DOJ has largely abandoned this theory of prosecution.\nAfter a seven-week jury trial in 2019, for his client Dr. Nick Nicholson, Tom successfully obtained the only acquittal in a 21-defendant federal healthcare fraud case involving allegations of $40 million in bribes and kickbacks. The so-called Forest Park case was the largest healthcare fraud investigation ever undertaken by federal authorities in Texas.\nTom was lead trial counsel for billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban in the widely publicized insider trading case brought by the SEC. The jury cleared Mr. Cuban of any wrongdoing following a three-week trial in Dallas federal court. Tom has represented Mr. Cuban, the Dallas Mavericks, and other Cuban business interests since 2000.\nTom and co-counsel from the Texas Attorney General’s office helped the State of Texas secure the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history. The $158 million settlement reached during trial followed claims of illegal marketing practices associated with the prescription drug Risperdal®. His work in the case was featured in a 15-part series authored by acclaimed legal journalist Steven Brill and published by the Huffington Post in 2015.\nTom’s $178 million jury trial win on behalf of the plaintiff Martin in Martin v. NL Industries, et al., included nearly $150 million in punitive damages. The jury award in the breach of fiduciary duty case was named one of the “Top Verdicts of 2009” by The National Law Journal, in addition to being recognized as one of the year’s three largest verdicts in Texas and the year’s largest verdict in Dallas County. On four other occasions, Tom’s cases have been recognized by NLJ among the nation’s top cases, including the defense of a qui tam action involving a government contract where his clients defeated a claim of fraudulent overpayment and won their affirmative claim that they had been underpaid.\nIn a mass tort case, Tom successfully defended a healthcare company sued by over 12,000 plaintiffs in state and federal multi-district litigation involving bet-the-company allegations that the client’s medical device was responsible for thousands of deaths and serious injuries. The first bellwether case in state court in Massachusetts ended in a complete defense verdict after a high-profile jury trial, leading to the bulk of the cases settling thereafter. Partner “Lawyer of the Year” – Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation Best Lawyers in America®, 2026 “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”  Benchmark Litigation US, 2019 – 2026 “Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas” D CEO Magazine, 2026-2026 IAM Global Leader IAM, 2021-2026 Recognized in 8 categories: Antitrust, Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, Litigation – Securities, Qui Tam Law The Best Lawyers in America®, 2007-2025 Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Nationwide Chambers USA, 2018-2025 Band 1 – Trial Lawyer – Texas Chambers USA, 2018-2025 Band 1 – Intellectual Property – Texas Chambers USA, 2007-2025 Band 1 – Litigation: General Commercial – Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds Chambers USA, 2020-2025 Band 1 – Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations Chambers USA, 2018-2025 Band 3 – Intellectual Property – Nationwide Chambers USA, 2020-2025 Band 1 – Litigation: Trial Lawyers, USA Chambers Global, 2019-2025 Band 3 – Intellectual Property: Patent, USA Chambers Global, 2018-2025 “Key Lawyer” in Intellectual Property: Patents: Litigation The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025 “Key Lawyer” in General Commercial Disputes The Legal 500 US, 2018-2025 “Leading Trial Lawyer” The Legal 500 US, 2023-2024 Inducted into the 2024 Lawdragon “Hall of Fame” Lawdragon, 2024 “100 Managing Partners you Need to Know”  Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Leading Litigators in America – Trial Law” Lawdragon, 2022-2025 “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers”  Lawdragon, 2023-2025 “500 Leading Environmental Lawyers”  Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Leading Energy Lawyers”  Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management” Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Leading Global Litigators”  Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Leading Global IP Lawyers”  Lawdragon, 2025 Super Lawyers, Texas 2003-2025 “Trials MVP” Law360, 2024-2025 “Top 500 Business Leaders in Dallas” D CEO Magazine, 2016–2023 “Best Lawyers Hall of Fame”  D Magazine, 2022 “Global Leader” for Commercial Litigation and IP–Patents Who’s Who Legal, 2022 Patents Leader WIPR Leaders, 2021, 2024 Lifetime Achievement Award Texas Lawyer, 2021 Texas Trailblazers Texas Lawyer, 2019 University of Notre Dame Notre Dame Law School The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Texas Law Clerk, Honorable Judge Homer Thornberry, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Halliburton v. U.S. Well Services (W.D. Tex.) As lead trial counsel, prevailed for USWS in the trial of the first of three patent infringement litigations filed by competitor Halliburton, which claimed that USWS infringed certain patents involving use of hydraulic fracturing software, as well as methods related to the operation and powering of UWS’ fracturing sites. U.S. v. DaVita, Inc, et al. (D. Colo.) Represented former DaVita CEO Kent Thiry as lead trial counsel in the defense of high-profile case involving novel Sherman Act conspiracy claims of horizontal market allocation in the labor market. Obtained complete defense verdict on all counts. In Re Fresenius Granuflo/Naturalyte Dialysate Product Liability Litigation (MDL Mass.) Co-lead trial counsel in defense of 12,000+ individual product liability cases, in which the first bellwether trial ended in defense verdict and the vast bulk of cases settled thereafter. U.S. v. Noryian (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel defending Dr. Leyla Nourian against charges related to an alleged healthcare fraud and money-laundering scheme involving compound pharmacies owned and operated by her family members. Just one week before a five-week trial, convinced the government to dismiss all charges against Dr. Nourian by submitting evidence that her signature had been forged on documents allegedly evidencing her involvement. E.T., et al. v. Morath, et al. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for group of children with disabilities challenging legality of Texas executive order banning mask mandates in public schools. After the district court denied emergency relief, all discovery and motion practice had to be condensed into just seven weeks. The bench trial resulted in the district court permanently enjoining enforcement of the executive order as violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act and preempted by federal law. Flypsi, Inc. d/b/a Flyp v. Google LLC (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Flyp, an inventor of a novel solution for setting up and connecting telephone calls using multiple phone numbers on a single mobile device, in a dispute alleging Google infringed five of its U.S. patents. Despite Google’s argument that it had launched a competing Google Voice product before Flyp’s invention, the jury rejected Google’s invalidity and prior use defenses and awarded Flyp $12 million for Google’s infringement. U.S. v. Alan Andrew Beauchamp, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Dr. Nick Nicholson, a bariatric surgeon alleged to have participated in a conspiracy with other medical professionals and hospital administrators to receive $40 million in health care bribes and kickbacks. After a seven-week trial with eight co-defendants, Nicholson was the lone defendant acquitted. America’s Auto Auction v. Zoellner, et al. (Oklahoma State Court) Trial counsel for plaintiff, a national auto auction company, in a case involving breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference claims, in which the jury found liability on all claims, awarded our client $2 million in actual damages, and found malice, after which the case settled during the punitive damages phase. Badger Midstream Inc. v. Scout Energy LP (Texas State Court) Represented a pipeline owner as lead trial counsel in a contract dispute with a gas processing company, which favorably settled mid-trial. John Doe v. Company, Inc. (Confidential Arbitration) Represented consumer product company in employment dispute with former board chairman, which resolved after favorable arbitration award rejecting all claims and awarding attorney’s fees to company. Tech Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. AlixaRx, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) Obtained defense verdict in jury trial on claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and fraud. SEC v. Mark Cuban (N.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban in a civil insider-trading case that, after a three-week trial, culminated in the jury returning a verdict for Mr. Cuban, clearing him of any wrongdoing. State of Texas Ex Rel. Allen Jones v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for relator in Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act case that settled during trial for $158 million, making it the largest Medicaid fraud settlement in Texas history by nearly a factor of two. Waterside Corporation, et al. v. Bayside Land Partners, LLC (Texas State Court) Represented developer of billion-dollar lakeside real estate project outside Dallas in this dispute, in which the client faced an injunction in favor of the marina owner restricting development, obtaining dissolution of the injunction in favor of marina owner and dismissal of all claims against developer. Ceats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in patent infringement case related to online ticketing, in which the jury returned a verdict of invalidity on all claims, thus avoiding alleged past and future damages of nearly $300 million. Rysher Entertainment, LLC., et al. v. Cox Media Group, Inc., et al. (Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles) Represented company owned by Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner in indemnity claim involving profit-sharing dispute with actor Don Johnson over television series “Nash Bridges,” in which the court granted summary judgment on liability in our client’s favor, and the case settled before trial. Martin v. NL Industries, Inc., et al. (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Martin, one of three minority shareholders, in breach of fiduciary duty and stockholder oppression case, in which the jury returned a verdict for $179 million that included in excess of $100 million in punitive damages. Halo Electronics Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., et al. (D. Nev.) Lead trial counsel for Halo Electronics, a family-run business, in a long-running patent case related to packaging for surface-mount magnetic components used in electronics products, in which a jury found defendant Pulse Electronics liable for willful infringement on three Halo patents, confirmed the patents’ validity, and awarded past damages. The case ended up in the United States Supreme Court, where the court vindicated Halo’s position on willfulness in patent litigation. YETI Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC., et al. (W.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for defendants in a case involving claims of trade dress, copyright, and patent infringement, which was resolved on favorable terms. Amerisourcebergen Specialty Group, Inc. v. FFF Enterprises, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Defended manufacturer of electronic medicine cabinet in patent infringement case brought by competitor; instituted IPR proceedings that resulted in a finding of invalidity of all asserted claim. Script Security Solutions L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc., in patent infringement lawsuit that resolved on favorable terms on the eve of trial. U.S. v. William Walters and Thomas Davis (S.D.N.Y.) Represent Chairman of the Board of a public company in securities fraud litigation. Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Co-lead trial counsel for Fresenius in a patent infringement case involving four patents relating to hemodialysis machines, in which a jury returned a verdict for Fresenius invalidating all asserted claims on all patents at trial (Baxter sought $87 million in damages and an injunction barring Fresenius from selling its “Fresenius 2008K” hemodialysis machine). Oasis Research, LLC v. Adrive LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for EMC in RICO case arising out of allegations of witness bribery and obstruction of justice, which resolved on favorable terms prior to trial. United States ex rel., Fisher, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for the relator in FCA litigation involving a federal program designed to assist homeowners following the 2008–2009 financial crisis, which favorably settled on the eve of trial. Judge Carlos Cortez v. Coyt Randal Johnston (Texas State Court) Represented defendant lawyer in defamation case brought by a sitting judge, which the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed and lost bid for re-election. Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. v. INEOS Group, Ltd. (Texas State Court) Obtained temporary injunction against world’s third-largest chemical company in Texas state court, to prevent use and disclosure of trade secrets involving high-density polyethylene manufacturing technology. Suit arose from defendant’s licensing of confidential polyethylene technology to various manufacturers in other countries, in contravention of licensing agreements. Injunction was affirmed on appeal by the Houston Court of Appeals. The case settled before trial but after the successful appeal. Rembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Ciba Vision Corporation, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for Rembrandt in a patent infringement case involving extended wear contact lenses. Obtained $41 million jury verdict. Deep Nines, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Deep Nines on patent related to Internet security. Obtained jury verdict of $18 million for patentee; twice the damages sought. Hillwood Investment Properties Ltd. v. Radical Mavericks Management LLC (Texas State Court) Lead counsel for ownership of Dallas Mavericks basketball team in case alleging mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained summary dismissal of all claims. Schroeder v. Wildenthal, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for a former Managing Partner of Akin Gump law firm in case alleging claims of conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty related to internationally famous art collection. Obtained dismissal of all claims. In re 9/11 Terrorist Attacks (S.D.N.Y.) Lead trial counsel for Al Rajhi family members in multi-district litigation in largest wrongful death case ever brought in the U.S. Obtained dismissal of all claims. Alcatel-Lucent Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (S.D. Cal.) Trial counsel for Microsoft in a series of patent cases involving MP3, video compression, and other software technology. Obtained reversal in post-trial motion practice and appeal of what was then the largest patent jury verdict in history. Texas Instruments v. Rajendra Talluri (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments (TI) in an inevitable disclosure/theft of trade secrets case. Obtained injunction for employer to prevent the inevitable disclosure of TI’s valuable trade secrets. EPG, Inc. v. Carreker, Inc. (D.N.J.) Lead trial counsel for Carreker in defense of trade secret case. Case settled after favorable trial verdict of no misappropriation of trade secrets. Alcatel v. Samsung,DC-96-08262 (193rd Dist. Ct., Dallas County, TX) Co-lead trial counsel for the plaintiff, a digital switch manufacturer, in a trade secret misappropriation case involving telecommunication technology in the largest trade secret case ever tried in Texas at the time, where damages sought were in excess of $500 million. The case settled in the middle of trial on confidential terms. Accolade Systems LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) Lead counsel for Citrix in a patent infringement case. Obtained dismissal of all claims on eve of trial. Carreker Corp. v. Jack Cannon, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for plaintiff Carreker in an inevitable disclosure and misappropriation of trade secrets case involving a former senior principal. Obtained an injunction against employee under inevitable and actual disclosure theories. Texas Instruments v. Gary Johnson (Texas State Court) Lead trial counsel for Texas Instruments in inevitable disclosure of trade secrets case leading to one of the first such injunctions issued by a Texas court. Radman v. Weil Gotshal, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead counsel for plaintiff in legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty case. Obtained multimillion-dollar settlement prior to trial. Universal Image, Inc. v. Cuban, et al. (Texas State Court) Lead counsel in $1 billion contract and fraud case. Obtained dismissal of all claims prior to trial. Taco Bell Corp. v. John R. W. Cracken, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Lead counsel in professional liability case on behalf of prominent attorney. Obtained dismissal of all claims. U.S. v. Lipscomb (N.D. Tex.) Co-lead counsel for defendant in public corruption case against prominent city councilman and civil rights leader. Home confinement obtained after trial; conviction reversed on appeal and case dismissed by government. BancTec USA, Inc. f/k/a Monitronics, Inc. v. Advanced Financial Solutions, Inc., et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Advanced Financial Solutions; won judgment against BancTec in a countersuit for tortious interference with contract. DSC Communications Corporation v. DGI Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for DSC in trade secrets case against competitor that induced DSC customers to disclose technology in breach of secrecy agreements involving Class IV tandem switch technology. Won $10 million judgment for DSC and developmental injunction and defeated antitrust counterclaims. U.S., ex rel. John D. Battaglia v. Texas Data Control, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Texas Data Control in qui tam case alleging overbillings in violation of the federal FCA. Defense verdict plus $15 million recovery on claim of under payment. U.S. v. Faulkner, et al. (N.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for the government in prosecution of bankers and developers in so-called I-30 condo case, which was largest bank fraud prosecution in Texas history. Obtained conviction of all defendants including RICO forfeiture.","searchable_name":"Thomas M. Melsheimer","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":176,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":445787,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6656,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVeronica S. Moy\u0026eacute; acts as lead counsel on highly complex matters in a wide variety of disciplines, including antitrust, intellectual property, class actions, and commercial and business disputes. She is nationally recognized for her abilities and accomplishments as a trial lawyer.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2025, Veronica was named to the Forbes \u0026ldquo;America\u0026rsquo;s Top Lawyers\u0026rdquo; list and to the Benchmark Litigation US \u0026ldquo;Top 250 Women in Litigation\u0026rdquo; list. Veronica was named \u0026ldquo;Trial Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; by the Dallas Bar Association and to Benchmark\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Top 10 Women in Litigation\u0026rdquo; list in 2022. Benchmark Litigation US also named her to its 2022 and 2023 \u0026ldquo;Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo; lists. BTI Consulting named Veronica to its 2014 BTI Client Service All-Stars list, and, in 2015, to its list of Client Service All-Star MVPs. She is ranked Chambers USA Band 1 for Antitrust \u0026ndash; Texas (2010-2025) and General Commercial Litigation \u0026ndash; Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds (2021-2025). She was included on \u0026ldquo;The Defenders\u0026rdquo; list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas by the Dallas Business Journal in 2009, following the unanimous defense verdict she obtained for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry in a copyright infringement matter. She has also been named as one of The Best Lawyers in America for Commercial Litigation and Litigation \u0026ndash; Antitrust (2013-2025). Texas Lawyer named Veronica one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law in 2015, and Dallas Business Journal named her one of the leading Women in Business in North Texas in 2011. In addition, she has been recognized as one of the \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025), \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Global Litigators\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025) and \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Litigators in America\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025) by Lawdragon.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVeronica previously served as general counsel of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest healthcare Group Purchasing Organization (GPO), and in that role, she had overall responsibility for all legal matters as well as for advising the company\u0026rsquo;s senior management, board of directors, and business units regarding the numerous antitrust, congressional/DOJ/HHS investigation, legislative, procurement, and compliance issues it faced.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"veronica-moye","email":"vmoye@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eServed as co-lead trial counsel for a leading technology firm defending unprecedented antitrust claims attacking the firm\u0026rsquo;s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial in May 2021, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which was described in the press as \u0026ldquo;the Super Bowl of Antitrust,\u0026rdquo; the Court ruled in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor on all antitrust claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare Group and its subsidiary United Surgical Partners in a Northern District of Illinois action alleging \u0026ldquo;no poach\u0026rdquo; agreements suppressed employee compensation in violation of the antitrust laws.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for The Charles Schwab Corp. in an action alleging the company\u0026rsquo;s merger with TD Ameritrade violates antitrust laws, pending in the Eastern District of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Southern Methodist University in Texas state court action where a division of the United Methodist Church sought to void the University\u0026rsquo;s amended Articles of Incorporation; successfully obtained dismissal of all claims at the trial court level.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for BNSF Railway when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in a United States District Court for the District of Columbia action alleging a conspiracy to fix the prices of fuel surcharges in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act had caused $30+ billion in damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in an action alleging a conspiracy to suppress nurse wages in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry at trial of copyright infringement action centered on his \u0026ldquo;Diary of a Mad Black Woman\u0026rdquo; film in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; obtained unanimous defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for BNSF Railway in Northern District of Texas and District of Minnesota proceedings where adversary sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages on trademark infringement claims premised on adversary\u0026rsquo;s use of internet domain names; obtained summary judgment in both proceedings; secured Fifth Circuit affirmance of Northern District of Texas ruling and Eighth Circuit affirmance of District of Minnesota ruling; also secured denial of petition for certiorari from the Fifth Circuit ruling in the United States Supreme Court; ultimately obtained an order requiring adversary to transfer its internet domain names to the railroad company. Obtained \u0026ldquo;prior restraint\u0026rdquo; temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing publication of information on the Internet in the District of Minnesota on behalf of BNSF Railway; defeated motions seeking to stay the restraint before the Eighth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans in the State of Louisiana, alleging invasion of patient privacy; settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eProsecuted Lanham Act and unfair competition claims based on false assertions regarding patent infringement on behalf of a memory chip manufacturer in the Eastern District of Texas and based on false assertions regarding comparative analgesic efficacy on behalf of over-the-counter analgesic manufacturer in the District of New Jersey.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended AT\u0026amp;T in nationwide class action alleging false advertising and marketing in New Jersey state court action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended Verizon in contract and fraud dispute with a vendor who claimed to have the contractual right to develop video-on-demand and home automation products; obtained summary judgment on vendor\u0026rsquo;s $525 million damages claim; co-lead counsel in two jury New Jersey state court trials on vendor\u0026rsquo;s claims; obtained remittitur of damages after the first trial; second trial limited to damages only and jury awarded less than the remitted damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Cal-Maine, the country\u0026rsquo;s largest shell egg and egg products producer, in a series of class action and opt-out matters, consolidated in a multi-district litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging producers nationwide participated in a supply-restriction scheme designed to fix the prices of eggs and egg products in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging certain hospitals agreed to exchange compensation information among themselves in a manner that has reduced competition among Detroit-area hospitals in the wages paid to registered nurses in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Novation, the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest healthcare GPO, in a $600 million Eastern District of Texas antitrust action alleging that certain contracting practices constitute unlawful exclusive dealing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and challenging bundled discount arrangements under section 2 of the Sherman Act; two co-defendants settled for cash payments of $49 million and $9 million, respectively; Novation settled the matter days prior to trial with no cash payment.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Moyé","nick_name":"Veronica","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Veronica","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1986-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America for General \u0026 Commercial Litigation","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Band 1 in Antitrust, Texas – described as “a powerhouse lawyer who does great work.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2009-2023"},{"title":"Ranked in Litigation: General Commercial, Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds – described as “a go-to litigator in a range of commercial disputes.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2021-2023"},{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Litigators for Global Litigation including: Anitrust, Class Actions, and IP","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023"},{"title":"Named as “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”","detail":"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023"},{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America for Litigation","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Named “Trial Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION, 2022"},{"title":"Named to “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”","detail":"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023"},{"title":"Recognized for Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Antitrust","detail":"THE BEST LAWYERS IN AMERICA®, 2013-2023"},{"title":"Named as one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law","detail":"TEXAS LAWYER, 2015"},{"title":"Named one of the Leading Women in Business in North Texas","detail":"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2015"},{"title":"Named to the 2014 BTI Client Service All-Star and 2015 Client Service All-Star MVP","detail":"BTI CONSULTING, 2014, 2015"},{"title":"Named on “The Defenders” list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas","detail":"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2009"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/veronica-moy%C3%A9-bb99736/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVeronica S. Moy\u0026eacute; acts as lead counsel on highly complex matters in a wide variety of disciplines, including antitrust, intellectual property, class actions, and commercial and business disputes. She is nationally recognized for her abilities and accomplishments as a trial lawyer.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2025, Veronica was named to the Forbes \u0026ldquo;America\u0026rsquo;s Top Lawyers\u0026rdquo; list and to the Benchmark Litigation US \u0026ldquo;Top 250 Women in Litigation\u0026rdquo; list. Veronica was named \u0026ldquo;Trial Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; by the Dallas Bar Association and to Benchmark\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Top 10 Women in Litigation\u0026rdquo; list in 2022. Benchmark Litigation US also named her to its 2022 and 2023 \u0026ldquo;Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo; lists. BTI Consulting named Veronica to its 2014 BTI Client Service All-Stars list, and, in 2015, to its list of Client Service All-Star MVPs. She is ranked Chambers USA Band 1 for Antitrust \u0026ndash; Texas (2010-2025) and General Commercial Litigation \u0026ndash; Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds (2021-2025). She was included on \u0026ldquo;The Defenders\u0026rdquo; list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas by the Dallas Business Journal in 2009, following the unanimous defense verdict she obtained for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry in a copyright infringement matter. She has also been named as one of The Best Lawyers in America for Commercial Litigation and Litigation \u0026ndash; Antitrust (2013-2025). Texas Lawyer named Veronica one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law in 2015, and Dallas Business Journal named her one of the leading Women in Business in North Texas in 2011. In addition, she has been recognized as one of the \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025), \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Global Litigators\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025) and \u0026ldquo;500 Leading Litigators in America\u0026rdquo; (2023-2025) by Lawdragon.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVeronica previously served as general counsel of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest healthcare Group Purchasing Organization (GPO), and in that role, she had overall responsibility for all legal matters as well as for advising the company\u0026rsquo;s senior management, board of directors, and business units regarding the numerous antitrust, congressional/DOJ/HHS investigation, legislative, procurement, and compliance issues it faced.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eServed as co-lead trial counsel for a leading technology firm defending unprecedented antitrust claims attacking the firm\u0026rsquo;s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial in May 2021, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which was described in the press as \u0026ldquo;the Super Bowl of Antitrust,\u0026rdquo; the Court ruled in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor on all antitrust claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare Group and its subsidiary United Surgical Partners in a Northern District of Illinois action alleging \u0026ldquo;no poach\u0026rdquo; agreements suppressed employee compensation in violation of the antitrust laws.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for The Charles Schwab Corp. in an action alleging the company\u0026rsquo;s merger with TD Ameritrade violates antitrust laws, pending in the Eastern District of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Southern Methodist University in Texas state court action where a division of the United Methodist Church sought to void the University\u0026rsquo;s amended Articles of Incorporation; successfully obtained dismissal of all claims at the trial court level.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for BNSF Railway when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in a United States District Court for the District of Columbia action alleging a conspiracy to fix the prices of fuel surcharges in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act had caused $30+ billion in damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in an action alleging a conspiracy to suppress nurse wages in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry at trial of copyright infringement action centered on his \u0026ldquo;Diary of a Mad Black Woman\u0026rdquo; film in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; obtained unanimous defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for BNSF Railway in Northern District of Texas and District of Minnesota proceedings where adversary sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages on trademark infringement claims premised on adversary\u0026rsquo;s use of internet domain names; obtained summary judgment in both proceedings; secured Fifth Circuit affirmance of Northern District of Texas ruling and Eighth Circuit affirmance of District of Minnesota ruling; also secured denial of petition for certiorari from the Fifth Circuit ruling in the United States Supreme Court; ultimately obtained an order requiring adversary to transfer its internet domain names to the railroad company. Obtained \u0026ldquo;prior restraint\u0026rdquo; temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing publication of information on the Internet in the District of Minnesota on behalf of BNSF Railway; defeated motions seeking to stay the restraint before the Eighth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans in the State of Louisiana, alleging invasion of patient privacy; settled on very favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eProsecuted Lanham Act and unfair competition claims based on false assertions regarding patent infringement on behalf of a memory chip manufacturer in the Eastern District of Texas and based on false assertions regarding comparative analgesic efficacy on behalf of over-the-counter analgesic manufacturer in the District of New Jersey.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended AT\u0026amp;T in nationwide class action alleging false advertising and marketing in New Jersey state court action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended Verizon in contract and fraud dispute with a vendor who claimed to have the contractual right to develop video-on-demand and home automation products; obtained summary judgment on vendor\u0026rsquo;s $525 million damages claim; co-lead counsel in two jury New Jersey state court trials on vendor\u0026rsquo;s claims; obtained remittitur of damages after the first trial; second trial limited to damages only and jury awarded less than the remitted damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Cal-Maine, the country\u0026rsquo;s largest shell egg and egg products producer, in a series of class action and opt-out matters, consolidated in a multi-district litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging producers nationwide participated in a supply-restriction scheme designed to fix the prices of eggs and egg products in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging certain hospitals agreed to exchange compensation information among themselves in a manner that has reduced competition among Detroit-area hospitals in the wages paid to registered nurses in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for Novation, the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest healthcare GPO, in a $600 million Eastern District of Texas antitrust action alleging that certain contracting practices constitute unlawful exclusive dealing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and challenging bundled discount arrangements under section 2 of the Sherman Act; two co-defendants settled for cash payments of $49 million and $9 million, respectively; Novation settled the matter days prior to trial with no cash payment.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America for General \u0026 Commercial Litigation","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Band 1 in Antitrust, Texas – described as “a powerhouse lawyer who does great work.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2009-2023"},{"title":"Ranked in Litigation: General Commercial, Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026 Surrounds – described as “a go-to litigator in a range of commercial disputes.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2021-2023"},{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Litigators for Global Litigation including: Anitrust, Class Actions, and IP","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023"},{"title":"Named as “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”","detail":"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023"},{"title":"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America for Litigation","detail":"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Named “Trial Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION, 2022"},{"title":"Named to “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”","detail":"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023"},{"title":"Recognized for Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Antitrust","detail":"THE BEST LAWYERS IN AMERICA®, 2013-2023"},{"title":"Named as one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law","detail":"TEXAS LAWYER, 2015"},{"title":"Named one of the Leading Women in Business in North Texas","detail":"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2015"},{"title":"Named to the 2014 BTI Client Service All-Star and 2015 Client Service All-Star MVP","detail":"BTI CONSULTING, 2014, 2015"},{"title":"Named on “The Defenders” list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas","detail":"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2009"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11543}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-13T16:02:32.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-13T16:02:32.000Z","searchable_text":"Moyé{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America for General \u0026amp; Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Band 1 in Antitrust, Texas – described as “a powerhouse lawyer who does great work.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CHAMBERS USA, 2009-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked in Litigation: General Commercial, Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds – described as “a go-to litigator in a range of commercial disputes.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CHAMBERS USA, 2021-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Litigators for Global Litigation including: Anitrust, Class Actions, and IP\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LAWDRAGON, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America for Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Trial Lawyer of the Year”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Antitrust\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"THE BEST LAWYERS IN AMERICA®, 2013-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"TEXAS LAWYER, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named one of the Leading Women in Business in North Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to the 2014 BTI Client Service All-Star and 2015 Client Service All-Star MVP\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BTI CONSULTING, 2014, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named on “The Defenders” list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2009\"}{{ FIELD }}Served as co-lead trial counsel for a leading technology firm defending unprecedented antitrust claims attacking the firm’s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial in May 2021, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which was described in the press as “the Super Bowl of Antitrust,” the Court ruled in our client’s favor on all antitrust claims.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare Group and its subsidiary United Surgical Partners in a Northern District of Illinois action alleging “no poach” agreements suppressed employee compensation in violation of the antitrust laws.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for The Charles Schwab Corp. in an action alleging the company’s merger with TD Ameritrade violates antitrust laws, pending in the Eastern District of Texas.{{ FIELD }}Represented Southern Methodist University in Texas state court action where a division of the United Methodist Church sought to void the University’s amended Articles of Incorporation; successfully obtained dismissal of all claims at the trial court level.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for BNSF Railway when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in a United States District Court for the District of Columbia action alleging a conspiracy to fix the prices of fuel surcharges in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act had caused $30+ billion in damages.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in an action alleging a conspiracy to suppress nurse wages in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry at trial of copyright infringement action centered on his “Diary of a Mad Black Woman” film in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; obtained unanimous defense verdict.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for BNSF Railway in Northern District of Texas and District of Minnesota proceedings where adversary sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages on trademark infringement claims premised on adversary’s use of internet domain names; obtained summary judgment in both proceedings; secured Fifth Circuit affirmance of Northern District of Texas ruling and Eighth Circuit affirmance of District of Minnesota ruling; also secured denial of petition for certiorari from the Fifth Circuit ruling in the United States Supreme Court; ultimately obtained an order requiring adversary to transfer its internet domain names to the railroad company. Obtained “prior restraint” temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing publication of information on the Internet in the District of Minnesota on behalf of BNSF Railway; defeated motions seeking to stay the restraint before the Eighth Circuit.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans in the State of Louisiana, alleging invasion of patient privacy; settled on very favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Prosecuted Lanham Act and unfair competition claims based on false assertions regarding patent infringement on behalf of a memory chip manufacturer in the Eastern District of Texas and based on false assertions regarding comparative analgesic efficacy on behalf of over-the-counter analgesic manufacturer in the District of New Jersey.{{ FIELD }}Defended AT\u0026amp;T in nationwide class action alleging false advertising and marketing in New Jersey state court action.{{ FIELD }}Defended Verizon in contract and fraud dispute with a vendor who claimed to have the contractual right to develop video-on-demand and home automation products; obtained summary judgment on vendor’s $525 million damages claim; co-lead counsel in two jury New Jersey state court trials on vendor’s claims; obtained remittitur of damages after the first trial; second trial limited to damages only and jury awarded less than the remitted damages.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Cal-Maine, the country’s largest shell egg and egg products producer, in a series of class action and opt-out matters, consolidated in a multi-district litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging producers nationwide participated in a supply-restriction scheme designed to fix the prices of eggs and egg products in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging certain hospitals agreed to exchange compensation information among themselves in a manner that has reduced competition among Detroit-area hospitals in the wages paid to registered nurses in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for Novation, the nation’s largest healthcare GPO, in a $600 million Eastern District of Texas antitrust action alleging that certain contracting practices constitute unlawful exclusive dealing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and challenging bundled discount arrangements under section 2 of the Sherman Act; two co-defendants settled for cash payments of $49 million and $9 million, respectively; Novation settled the matter days prior to trial with no cash payment.{{ FIELD }}Veronica S. Moyé acts as lead counsel on highly complex matters in a wide variety of disciplines, including antitrust, intellectual property, class actions, and commercial and business disputes. She is nationally recognized for her abilities and accomplishments as a trial lawyer. \nIn 2025, Veronica was named to the Forbes “America’s Top Lawyers” list and to the Benchmark Litigation US “Top 250 Women in Litigation” list. Veronica was named “Trial Lawyer of the Year” by the Dallas Bar Association and to Benchmark’s “Top 10 Women in Litigation” list in 2022. Benchmark Litigation US also named her to its 2022 and 2023 “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” lists. BTI Consulting named Veronica to its 2014 BTI Client Service All-Stars list, and, in 2015, to its list of Client Service All-Star MVPs. She is ranked Chambers USA Band 1 for Antitrust – Texas (2010-2025) and General Commercial Litigation – Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds (2021-2025). She was included on “The Defenders” list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas by the Dallas Business Journal in 2009, following the unanimous defense verdict she obtained for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry in a copyright infringement matter. She has also been named as one of The Best Lawyers in America for Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Antitrust (2013-2025). Texas Lawyer named Veronica one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law in 2015, and Dallas Business Journal named her one of the leading Women in Business in North Texas in 2011. In addition, she has been recognized as one of the “500 Leading Lawyers in America” (2023-2025), “500 Leading Global Litigators” (2023-2025) and “500 Leading Litigators in America” (2023-2025) by Lawdragon.\nVeronica previously served as general counsel of the nation’s largest healthcare Group Purchasing Organization (GPO), and in that role, she had overall responsibility for all legal matters as well as for advising the company’s senior management, board of directors, and business units regarding the numerous antitrust, congressional/DOJ/HHS investigation, legislative, procurement, and compliance issues it faced.\n  Partner Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America for General \u0026amp; Commercial Litigation LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024 Band 1 in Antitrust, Texas – described as “a powerhouse lawyer who does great work.” CHAMBERS USA, 2009-2023 Ranked in Litigation: General Commercial, Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth \u0026amp; Surrounds – described as “a go-to litigator in a range of commercial disputes.” CHAMBERS USA, 2021-2023 Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Litigators for Global Litigation including: Anitrust, Class Actions, and IP LAWDRAGON, 2023 Named as “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023 Named to the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America for Litigation LAWDRAGON, 2023-2024 Named “Trial Lawyer of the Year” DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION, 2022 Named to “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” BENCHMARK LITIGATION US, 2022-2023 Recognized for Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Antitrust THE BEST LAWYERS IN AMERICA®, 2013-2023 Named as one of the Extraordinary Minorities in Texas Law TEXAS LAWYER, 2015 Named one of the Leading Women in Business in North Texas DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2015 Named to the 2014 BTI Client Service All-Star and 2015 Client Service All-Star MVP BTI CONSULTING, 2014, 2015 Named on “The Defenders” list of the best defense lawyers in North Texas DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL, 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology  Harvard University Harvard Law School Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan New Jersey New York Texas Dallas Bar Association Antitrust Law \u0026amp; Economics Institute, Faculty Served as co-lead trial counsel for a leading technology firm defending unprecedented antitrust claims attacking the firm’s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial in May 2021, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which was described in the press as “the Super Bowl of Antitrust,” the Court ruled in our client’s favor on all antitrust claims. Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare Group and its subsidiary United Surgical Partners in a Northern District of Illinois action alleging “no poach” agreements suppressed employee compensation in violation of the antitrust laws. Lead counsel for The Charles Schwab Corp. in an action alleging the company’s merger with TD Ameritrade violates antitrust laws, pending in the Eastern District of Texas. Represented Southern Methodist University in Texas state court action where a division of the United Methodist Church sought to void the University’s amended Articles of Incorporation; successfully obtained dismissal of all claims at the trial court level. Lead counsel for BNSF Railway when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in a United States District Court for the District of Columbia action alleging a conspiracy to fix the prices of fuel surcharges in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act had caused $30+ billion in damages. Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare when it was able to successfully defeat class certification in an action alleging a conspiracy to suppress nurse wages in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Lead counsel for writer, producer, director, and actor Tyler Perry at trial of copyright infringement action centered on his “Diary of a Mad Black Woman” film in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; obtained unanimous defense verdict. Lead counsel for BNSF Railway in Northern District of Texas and District of Minnesota proceedings where adversary sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages on trademark infringement claims premised on adversary’s use of internet domain names; obtained summary judgment in both proceedings; secured Fifth Circuit affirmance of Northern District of Texas ruling and Eighth Circuit affirmance of District of Minnesota ruling; also secured denial of petition for certiorari from the Fifth Circuit ruling in the United States Supreme Court; ultimately obtained an order requiring adversary to transfer its internet domain names to the railroad company. Obtained “prior restraint” temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing publication of information on the Internet in the District of Minnesota on behalf of BNSF Railway; defeated motions seeking to stay the restraint before the Eighth Circuit. Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans in the State of Louisiana, alleging invasion of patient privacy; settled on very favorable terms. Prosecuted Lanham Act and unfair competition claims based on false assertions regarding patent infringement on behalf of a memory chip manufacturer in the Eastern District of Texas and based on false assertions regarding comparative analgesic efficacy on behalf of over-the-counter analgesic manufacturer in the District of New Jersey. Defended AT\u0026amp;T in nationwide class action alleging false advertising and marketing in New Jersey state court action. Defended Verizon in contract and fraud dispute with a vendor who claimed to have the contractual right to develop video-on-demand and home automation products; obtained summary judgment on vendor’s $525 million damages claim; co-lead counsel in two jury New Jersey state court trials on vendor’s claims; obtained remittitur of damages after the first trial; second trial limited to damages only and jury awarded less than the remitted damages. Lead counsel for Cal-Maine, the country’s largest shell egg and egg products producer, in a series of class action and opt-out matters, consolidated in a multi-district litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging producers nationwide participated in a supply-restriction scheme designed to fix the prices of eggs and egg products in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms. Lead counsel for Tenet Healthcare in a class action, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging certain hospitals agreed to exchange compensation information among themselves in a manner that has reduced competition among Detroit-area hospitals in the wages paid to registered nurses in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; settled on favorable terms. Lead counsel for Novation, the nation’s largest healthcare GPO, in a $600 million Eastern District of Texas antitrust action alleging that certain contracting practices constitute unlawful exclusive dealing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and challenging bundled discount arrangements under section 2 of the Sherman Act; two co-defendants settled for cash payments of $49 million and $9 million, respectively; Novation settled the matter days prior to trial with no cash payment.","searchable_name":"Veronica Moyé","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":445429,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6187,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eA partner in our Finance and Restructuring practice, David Ridenour represents financial institutions as issuers, underwriters, borrowers, lenders, sellers and purchasers in a variety of sophisticated asset-backed securitization and structured lending transactions. \u0026nbsp;In particular, he is an industry leader\u0026nbsp;in the digital infrastructure space, where he serves as issuer\u0026rsquo;s counsel for some of the largest and most active 144A and 4(a)(2) issuance platforms in the market.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid also advises lenders and borrowers with respect to senior and mezzanine credit facilities involving unsecured consumer loans, small business loans, mortgage and home equity loans and energy efficiency and solar loans, as well as advising both sellers and purchasers in forward flow purchase arrangements. David has years of experience working on both SEC publicly-registered and privately-negotiated securitization platforms totaling more than $100 billion in issuance value, secured by credit card receivables, franchise loans, timeshare receivables, mortgage servicing rights, automobile loans and leases, equipment loans and leases, mortgage-backed securities and trade receivables.\u003cbr /\u003eChambers USA has ranked David as a Band 4 leading lawyer and noted that he is particularly renowned for his strengths in digital infrastructure ABS mandates. Legal500 similarly highlights David as a key lawyer and emphasizes his prominent work involving cellular towers, fiber networks, and data center securitizations. Additionally, David is a frequent speaker at industry events as an expert in the digital infrastructure space.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"david-ridenour","email":"dridenour@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAligned Energy\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Advised Aligned on the issuance of $1.35 billion of securitized notes. Largest inaugural data center securitization and first-ever green bond data center securitization.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStack Infrastructure \u0026ndash;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eHave advised Stack on the issuance of over $1.70 billion of securitized notes. Most recent trade established a record-setting rate for the data center space.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSabey Data Centers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised Sabey on the issuance of $975 million of securitized notes. Sabey obtained the first-ever A+ rating for a data center securitization.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompass Data Centers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised Compass on the issuance of over $850 million of securitized notes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLandmark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised the Landmark and is affiliates on the issuance of $400 million of securitized notes.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":82,"guid":"82.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":26,"guid":"26.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Ridenour","nick_name":"David","clerkships":[],"first_name":"David","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[{"id":2237,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2005-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"L.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"\"...extremely responsive and dependable, and stand ready to act for the large volume of transaction work at my company.\"","detail":"Legal 500, 2025"},{"title":"\"David is incredibly smart and commercial.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"\"David is a thought leader and trusted counselor.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"\"David has been a great resource for our company and a partner to us on our transactions.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"Named Leading Lawyers in America","detail":"Leading Lawyers in America, 2024"},{"title":"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA 2024"},{"title":"Rising Star","detail":"IFLR"},{"title":"Recognized","detail":"Legal 500"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-ridenour-623aab45/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eA partner in our Finance and Restructuring practice, David Ridenour represents financial institutions as issuers, underwriters, borrowers, lenders, sellers and purchasers in a variety of sophisticated asset-backed securitization and structured lending transactions. \u0026nbsp;In particular, he is an industry leader\u0026nbsp;in the digital infrastructure space, where he serves as issuer\u0026rsquo;s counsel for some of the largest and most active 144A and 4(a)(2) issuance platforms in the market.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid also advises lenders and borrowers with respect to senior and mezzanine credit facilities involving unsecured consumer loans, small business loans, mortgage and home equity loans and energy efficiency and solar loans, as well as advising both sellers and purchasers in forward flow purchase arrangements. David has years of experience working on both SEC publicly-registered and privately-negotiated securitization platforms totaling more than $100 billion in issuance value, secured by credit card receivables, franchise loans, timeshare receivables, mortgage servicing rights, automobile loans and leases, equipment loans and leases, mortgage-backed securities and trade receivables.\u003cbr /\u003eChambers USA has ranked David as a Band 4 leading lawyer and noted that he is particularly renowned for his strengths in digital infrastructure ABS mandates. Legal500 similarly highlights David as a key lawyer and emphasizes his prominent work involving cellular towers, fiber networks, and data center securitizations. Additionally, David is a frequent speaker at industry events as an expert in the digital infrastructure space.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAligned Energy\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Advised Aligned on the issuance of $1.35 billion of securitized notes. Largest inaugural data center securitization and first-ever green bond data center securitization.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStack Infrastructure \u0026ndash;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eHave advised Stack on the issuance of over $1.70 billion of securitized notes. Most recent trade established a record-setting rate for the data center space.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSabey Data Centers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised Sabey on the issuance of $975 million of securitized notes. Sabey obtained the first-ever A+ rating for a data center securitization.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompass Data Centers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised Compass on the issuance of over $850 million of securitized notes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLandmark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026ndash; Have advised the Landmark and is affiliates on the issuance of $400 million of securitized notes.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"\"...extremely responsive and dependable, and stand ready to act for the large volume of transaction work at my company.\"","detail":"Legal 500, 2025"},{"title":"\"David is incredibly smart and commercial.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"\"David is a thought leader and trusted counselor.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"\"David has been a great resource for our company and a partner to us on our transactions.\"","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA 2025"},{"title":"Named Leading Lawyers in America","detail":"Leading Lawyers in America, 2024"},{"title":"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide","detail":"Chambers USA 2024"},{"title":"Rising Star","detail":"IFLR"},{"title":"Recognized","detail":"Legal 500"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9357}]},"capability_group_id":1},"created_at":"2026-01-30T22:02:18.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-30T22:02:18.000Z","searchable_text":"Ridenour{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"...extremely responsive and dependable, and stand ready to act for the large volume of transaction work at my company.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"David is incredibly smart and commercial.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"David is a thought leader and trusted counselor.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"David has been a great resource for our company and a partner to us on our transactions.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Leading Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyers in America, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"IFLR\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}Aligned Energy – Advised Aligned on the issuance of $1.35 billion of securitized notes. Largest inaugural data center securitization and first-ever green bond data center securitization.{{ FIELD }}Stack Infrastructure – Have advised Stack on the issuance of over $1.70 billion of securitized notes. Most recent trade established a record-setting rate for the data center space.{{ FIELD }}Sabey Data Centers – Have advised Sabey on the issuance of $975 million of securitized notes. Sabey obtained the first-ever A+ rating for a data center securitization.{{ FIELD }}Compass Data Centers – Have advised Compass on the issuance of over $850 million of securitized notes.{{ FIELD }}Landmark – Have advised the Landmark and is affiliates on the issuance of $400 million of securitized notes.{{ FIELD }}A partner in our Finance and Restructuring practice, David Ridenour represents financial institutions as issuers, underwriters, borrowers, lenders, sellers and purchasers in a variety of sophisticated asset-backed securitization and structured lending transactions.  In particular, he is an industry leader in the digital infrastructure space, where he serves as issuer’s counsel for some of the largest and most active 144A and 4(a)(2) issuance platforms in the market.\nDavid also advises lenders and borrowers with respect to senior and mezzanine credit facilities involving unsecured consumer loans, small business loans, mortgage and home equity loans and energy efficiency and solar loans, as well as advising both sellers and purchasers in forward flow purchase arrangements. David has years of experience working on both SEC publicly-registered and privately-negotiated securitization platforms totaling more than $100 billion in issuance value, secured by credit card receivables, franchise loans, timeshare receivables, mortgage servicing rights, automobile loans and leases, equipment loans and leases, mortgage-backed securities and trade receivables.Chambers USA has ranked David as a Band 4 leading lawyer and noted that he is particularly renowned for his strengths in digital infrastructure ABS mandates. Legal500 similarly highlights David as a key lawyer and emphasizes his prominent work involving cellular towers, fiber networks, and data center securitizations. Additionally, David is a frequent speaker at industry events as an expert in the digital infrastructure space.  Partner \"...extremely responsive and dependable, and stand ready to act for the large volume of transaction work at my company.\" Legal 500, 2025 \"David is incredibly smart and commercial.\" Chambers USA 2025 \"David is a thought leader and trusted counselor.\" Chambers USA 2025 \"David has been a great resource for our company and a partner to us on our transactions.\" Chambers USA 2025 Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide Chambers USA 2025 Named Leading Lawyers in America Leading Lawyers in America, 2024 Top ranked - Band 4 lawyer, Capital Markets: Securitization: ABS-USA-Nationwide Chambers USA 2024 Rising Star IFLR Recognized Legal 500 University of Nebraska at Lincoln Lincoln College of Law University of Michigan University of Michigan Law School District of Columbia Texas Virginia Aligned Energy – Advised Aligned on the issuance of $1.35 billion of securitized notes. Largest inaugural data center securitization and first-ever green bond data center securitization. Stack Infrastructure – Have advised Stack on the issuance of over $1.70 billion of securitized notes. Most recent trade established a record-setting rate for the data center space. Sabey Data Centers – Have advised Sabey on the issuance of $975 million of securitized notes. Sabey obtained the first-ever A+ rating for a data center securitization. Compass Data Centers – Have advised Compass on the issuance of over $850 million of securitized notes. Landmark – Have advised the Landmark and is affiliates on the issuance of $400 million of securitized notes.","searchable_name":"David L. Ridenour","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":435809,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6591,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSean Royall serves as the firm\u0026rsquo;s Global Practice Head for Antitrust and Consumer Protection. He has spent his entire career handling complex litigation matters and government investigations and is among the country\u0026rsquo;s most experienced and highly regarded antitrust lawyers. He focuses broadly on antitrust and consumer protection litigation, government investigations, and counseling, and is a highly experienced courtroom litigator with a stellar track record for winning high-stakes cases. Sean is equally effective navigating complex government investigations and advising clients on the details of a wide range of strategic antitrust and consumer protection issues.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean previously served at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as the Deputy Director of the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Bureau of Competition. His antitrust career, both in government and private practice, has included work on many major mergers and acquisitions, as well as lead roles in complex litigation matters that often intersect with other areas of law, including patent law, various federal regulatory regimes, consumer protection, and privacy. Sean has deep experience representing clients across a range of industries, including biopharma, healthcare, e-commerce, telecom, financial services, energy, transportation, software, and semiconductors. In addition\u0026nbsp;to his work on U.S. antitrust and consumer protection matters, Sean has worked and advised on many similar cases and investigations in Europe and other parts of the world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile\u0026nbsp;in government, Sean\u0026nbsp;was the lead trial lawyer in the FTC\u0026rsquo;s landmark monopolization suit against computer chip maker Rambus Inc., a novel case that established new legal standards applicable to patent disclosure within industry standard-setting consortiums. More recently, Sean played an important role on the trial team for AT\u0026amp;T in the company\u0026rsquo;s victory over the Department of Justice\u0026rsquo;s antitrust challenge to AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner. In addition to his trial experience, Sean has successfully argued appeals in courts around the country.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean also has a nationally prominent reputation for his work in the consumer protection area, where he has particularly deep experience handling FTC investigations and associated litigation focused on advertising, marketing, privacy, and data security issues. In 2018-19, for example, Sean served as lead counsel for Facebook in connection with the FTC\u0026rsquo;s extensive privacy-related investigation and subsequent settlement. He brings to this area of his practice deep knowledge of applicable law and agency practice, as well as the skills of an accomplished litigator.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor well more than a decade, Sean has been given a Band 1 ranking by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(2007-2025)\u003cem\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewhich has described him as \u0026ldquo;top of the field,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;a star in the antitrust world both in counseling and litigation,\u0026rdquo; and an \u0026ldquo;extremely talented lawyer and exceptional litigator.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean\u0026rsquo;s other recognitions include being ranked in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers Global\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for Antitrust \u0026ndash; USA (2020-2023); endorsed as \u0026ldquo;Highly Recommended (Texas)\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGlobal Competition Review\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2025); named a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Star\u0026rdquo; for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2023). He is named by \u003cem\u003eLexology\u003c/em\u003e as a \"Competition Thought Leader\" (2025);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;The Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \u0026ldquo;Antitrust Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; (2015, 2018); and \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \u0026ldquo;Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; (2019). He has also been named to the \u0026ldquo;All-Star List\u0026rdquo; by BTI Services (2017) and deemed a \u0026ldquo;National Antitrust MVP\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2015); a \u0026ldquo;Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2015); and a \u0026ldquo;Life Sciences Star\u0026rdquo; in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018\u0026ndash;2019) by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLMG Life Sciences\u003c/em\u003e. For the fourth year in a row, Sean was also named by \u003cem\u003eLawdragon \u003c/em\u003eas one of the \"500 Leading Litigators in America.\"\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean has written extensively on a wide range of topics relevant to, among other things, antitrust law and policy, consumer protection, privacy, FTC process and remedies, class action antitrust litigation, pharmaceutical antitrust, and standard setting. Sean previously served as Editorial Chair of the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, and as an editor of the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;magazine and of the Von Kalinowski treatise on\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Laws and Trade Regulation\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;A Google Breakup Would Serve Progressive Aims and Punish Business,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eBloomberg Law\u003c/em\u003e, October 5, 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s Punctuated Equilibrium,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s COPPA Conundrum: Ambiguities in the Rule and a Dearth of Authoritative Guidance Leave the Agency Vulnerable to Legal Challenges\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, September 9, 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Antitrust and Consumer Protection at Last Converge,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCorporate Counsel\u003c/em\u003e, April 27, 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;CFPB May Fill Enforcement Gap After FTC\u0026rsquo;s High Court Loss,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e, May 6, 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;By the Numbers: 5 Practices That Could Drive Big Law in 2021,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBloomberg Law\u003c/em\u003e, December 23, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;\u0026lsquo;Hipster Antitrust\u0026rsquo; Comes for Joe Biden,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNew York Times\u003c/em\u003e, November 13, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;A Watershed Moment? What Comes Next for the FTC in the Wake of AMG,\u0026rdquo;\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;ABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, August 9, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Intersection of Antitrust and the False Claims Act,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHeadnotes\u003c/em\u003e, Dallas Bar Association, June 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Unpacking the New FTC/DOJ Draft Vertical Merger Guidelines,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, March 9, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Seventh Circuit Sets Up Potential Supreme Court Review of FTC Monetary Relief Authority,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, December 12, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Next Stop, Supreme Court? Seventh Circuit Goes Its Own Way on FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, September 3, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Taking Stock of FTC Cybersecurity Enforcement After the Equifax Settlement,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, August 7, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Ninth Circuit Judges Call for En Banc Review of FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, January 15, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCo-author, \u0026ldquo;Lessons from FTC\u0026rsquo;s Loss in, and Subsequent Abandonment of, DirecTV Advertising Case,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, October 23, 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCo-author, \u0026ldquo;Are Disgorgement\u0026rsquo;s Days Numbered?\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eKokesh v. SEC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;May Foreshadow Curtailment of the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Will\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eKokesh v. FTC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Put a Kink in the Federal Trade Commission\u0026rsquo;s Disgorgement Hose?\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, July 10, 2017.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Antitrust Scrutiny of Pharmaceutical Product Hopping,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Fall 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;When Mergers Become a Private Matter: An Updated Antitrust Primer,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Evaluating Mergers Between Potential Competitors Under the New Horizontal Merger Guidelines,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Fall 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Complexities of Litigating Generic Drug Exclusion Claims in the Antitrust Class Action Context,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Change?: Merger Enforcement in the New Administration,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Advocate\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Deterring \u0026lsquo;Patent Ambush\u0026rsquo; in Standard Setting: Lessons from Rambus and Qualcomm,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s N-Data Consent Order: A Missed Opportunity to Clarify Antitrust in Standard Setting,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2008.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Avoiding the Scarlet \u0026lsquo;S\u0026rsquo;: The Modern Challenges of Document Preservation and Destruction,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, June 2005.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Art of Destruction,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, September 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Standard Setting and Exclusionary Conduct: The Role of Antitrust in Policing Unilateral Abuses of a Standard-Setting Process,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e, 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Administrative Litigation at the FTC: Past, Present, and Future,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2003.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Noerr Immunity for Sponsoring Litigation: From Burlington Northern to Baltimore Scrap,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e, 2001.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Coping with the Antitrust Risks of Technological Integration,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2000.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Disaggregation\u0026nbsp;of Antitrust Damages,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 1997.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Post-Chicago Economics,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 1995.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","slug":"sean-royall","email":"sroyall@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLitigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Represented Forest Labs. and affiliates in this still-ongoing indirect purchaser antitrust class action involving allegations of \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo; and a challenged \u0026ldquo;reverse payment\u0026rdquo; patent settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Restasis Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this consolidated MDL antitrust class action involving complex patent- and FDA-related monopolization claims predicated on allegations of delayed entry of generic drugs. Cases settled favorably for defendants after class certification and summary judgment briefing and arguments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. ex rel. Silbersher v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this False Claims Act litigation in which a private relator sought to assert claims of alleged fraud against the government predicated on a patent-related theory and assertions of delayed generic drug entry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re JUUL Labs., Inc. Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel in this still-ongoing consolidated MDL antitrust class action challenging an allegedly unlawful agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in this suit in which DOJ asserted that AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s DirecTV unit engaged in improper coordination and information sharing relating to pay TV distributors\u0026rsquo; negotiations with the provider of sports-related television content; case settled on highly favorable terms after full briefing of AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFTC v. Lending Club\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Lending Club in this suit in which the FTC asserted multiple consumer protection-based claims relating to Lending Club\u0026rsquo;s marketing and advertising practices and privacy-related compliance; argued summary and obtained partial victories; case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.D.C. \u0026amp; D.C. Cir.) \u0026ndash; Played an important role on the trial team in this landmark case in which AT\u0026amp;T defeated a DOJ antitrust challenge to the company\u0026rsquo;s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner, an outcome that was later affirmed on appeal in the D.C. Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSureShot v. Topgolf\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D. Tex. \u0026amp; 5th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Topgolf in this antitrust suit asserting monopolization claims; obtained full dismissal of all claims by district court and unanimous affirmance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCipla v. Amgen\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Amgen in this monopolization suit brought by a generic drug competitor; argued preliminary injunction motion and participated in later interlocutory appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eShire v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. N.J.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit involving alleged bundling and exclusive dealing practices; argued successful motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHartig v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this putative antitrust class action asserting that Allergan delayed generic entry through alleged \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo;; argued successful motion to dismiss and later defended that ruling through oral argument before the Third Circuit; case was settled on highly favorable terms after remand to district court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eApotex v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit predicated on claims of unlawful \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo;; obtained highly favorable settlement after the close of fact and expert discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this competitor monopolization suit asserting patent- and FDA-related antitrust claims; successfully argued for dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. ex rel. Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this suit in which a competing generic drug company, having had its own antitrust claims dismissed, sought to assert related False Claims Act claims as a purported relator; case was fully dismissed by the district court and the outcome was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFTC v. Commerce Planet\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Represented former Commerce Planet CEO in this FTC consumer protection suit in which the client, represented by prior counsel, was subjected to a judgment with significant personal liability.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStanwood v. Mary Kay Cosmetics\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Mary Kay in this putative class action case alleging fraud and unfair competition relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s prior participation in industry pledge not to conduct animal-based testing; obtained full dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAvery Dennison v. 3M Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Minn.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for 3M in this competitor suit alleging that 3M monopolized markets through wrongful patent-related conduct in the context of industry standard-setting activities; case settled on highly favorable terms following the close of fact and expert discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Pa.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Biovail in this antitrust class action alleging patent-related monopolization and conspiracy claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTodd v. Exxon, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for Phillips Petroleum in this putative antitrust class action alleging conspiracy claims based on asserted improper sharing of salary and benefits information.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNeon Systems v. BMC Software\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Tex. Civ.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for BMC Software in this competitor suit alleging that BMC had monopolized markets through unlawful pricing and bundling practices; case settled favorably shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAtlantic Coast Airlines v. Mesa Airlines\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.D.C.) \u0026ndash; Served as trial counsel for Atlantic Coast Airlines in this successful antitrust action obtaining a preliminary injunction barring United Airlines and Mesa Airlines from proceeding with a contemplated business arrangement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eContinental Forge v. Sempra Energy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Sup. Ct. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Represented Sempra Energy and affiliates in this suit alleging antitrust conspiracy claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLonghorn Partners Pipeline Co. v. Holly Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented Holly Corp. in this antitrust suit alleging monopolization of West Texas petroleum pipelines.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AMR Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Kansas) \u0026ndash; Represented American Airlines and parent AMR in this government antitrust suit alleging predatory pricing; case resolved through summary judgment for defendants.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLitton Systems v. Honeywell\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal. \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Represented Honeywell in this competitor monopolization suit alleging that Honeywell improperly excluded competition in the market for commercial avionics systems; successfully argued motion for directed verdict on majority of claims at issue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eContinental Airlines v. American Airlines\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash;Represented American Airlines in this suit alleging improper predatory pricing relating to American\u0026rsquo;s introduction of a new fare structure; obtained favorable jury verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGovernment Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKurbo/WW Inc. \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for WW International and affiliate Kurbo in connection with FTC privacy (COPPA) investigation and settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eGoogle/Fitbit \u0026ndash; Counsel for Fitbit in connection with DOJ investigation of Google\u0026rsquo;s successful US$2.1 billion acquisition of Fitbit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAT\u0026amp;T/Time Warner \u0026ndash; Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAT\u0026amp;T/DirecTV \u0026ndash; Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$48 billion acquisition of DirecTV.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFacebook \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Facebook in connection with FTC investigation relating to compliance with prior 2012 consent order prescribing certain privacy-related standards and practices; also lead counsel for the company in connection with the prior 2012 FTC privacy investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBazaarvoice \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Bazaarvoice relating to DOJ antitrust and order compliance investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTicketmaster/LiveNation \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Ticketmaster in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s US$2.5 billion acquisition of LiveNation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWilliams Cos. \u0026ndash; Lead antitrust counsel for Williams in connection with proposed US$38 billion acquisition by Energy Transfer Equity LP.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLeon Max/Max Studios \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Max Studios in connection with FTC investigation of asserted violations of prior FTC consent order imposing restrictions on advertising of textile content of retail garments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eValueClick \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for ValueClick in connection with FTC consumer protection claims involving various privacy and online advertising issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAllergan \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Allergan in connection with FTC investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$3.2 billion acquisition of Inamed Corp.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWatson Wyatt \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Watson Wyatt in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$3.5 billion acquisition of Towers Perrin.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eUnited Defense \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for United Defense in DOJ investigation of BAe\u0026rsquo;s successful US$4.2 billion acquisition of UDI.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAncestry.com \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Ancestry.com in connection with FTC investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful acquisition of Archive.com.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eEndocare \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Endocare in connection with FTC investigation of proposed merger with Galil Medical.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDiedrichCoffee \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Diedrich in FTC investigation of successful merger with Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eNumerous other representations as lead counsel in non-public government investigations, including many FTC consumer protection matters, where successful results leading to closures of the investigations caused them to remain non-public matters.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1147,"guid":"1147.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1141,"guid":"1141.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":12,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":14,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":15,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":16,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":17,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":18,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":19,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":20,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Royall","nick_name":"M. Sean","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Patrick E. Higginbotham, U.S Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit","years_held":"1990 - 1991"}],"first_name":"M. Sean","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2174,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude, Law Review","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1990-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked Band 1 for Antitrust, Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2007–2023"},{"title":"Top ranked for Antitrust USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2020–2023"},{"title":"Named a “Litigation Star” for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023"},{"title":"Named “Highly Recommended (Texas)”","detail":"Global Competition Review, 2022"},{"title":"Named “Life Sciences Star” in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018–2019)","detail":"LMG Life Sciences"},{"title":"Named as one of “500 Leading Litigators in America”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022 and 2024"},{"title":"Listed","detail":"Who’s Who Legal in Competition, 2021"},{"title":"Named “Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2019"},{"title":"Named “Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2015 and 2018"},{"title":"Listed in “All-Star List”","detail":"BTI Services, 2017"},{"title":"Named “Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer”","detail":"National Law Journal, 2015"},{"title":"Named “National Antitrust MVP”","detail":"Law360, 2015"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/sean-royall-16964b232/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSean Royall serves as the firm\u0026rsquo;s Global Practice Head for Antitrust and Consumer Protection. He has spent his entire career handling complex litigation matters and government investigations and is among the country\u0026rsquo;s most experienced and highly regarded antitrust lawyers. He focuses broadly on antitrust and consumer protection litigation, government investigations, and counseling, and is a highly experienced courtroom litigator with a stellar track record for winning high-stakes cases. Sean is equally effective navigating complex government investigations and advising clients on the details of a wide range of strategic antitrust and consumer protection issues.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean previously served at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as the Deputy Director of the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Bureau of Competition. His antitrust career, both in government and private practice, has included work on many major mergers and acquisitions, as well as lead roles in complex litigation matters that often intersect with other areas of law, including patent law, various federal regulatory regimes, consumer protection, and privacy. Sean has deep experience representing clients across a range of industries, including biopharma, healthcare, e-commerce, telecom, financial services, energy, transportation, software, and semiconductors. In addition\u0026nbsp;to his work on U.S. antitrust and consumer protection matters, Sean has worked and advised on many similar cases and investigations in Europe and other parts of the world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile\u0026nbsp;in government, Sean\u0026nbsp;was the lead trial lawyer in the FTC\u0026rsquo;s landmark monopolization suit against computer chip maker Rambus Inc., a novel case that established new legal standards applicable to patent disclosure within industry standard-setting consortiums. More recently, Sean played an important role on the trial team for AT\u0026amp;T in the company\u0026rsquo;s victory over the Department of Justice\u0026rsquo;s antitrust challenge to AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner. In addition to his trial experience, Sean has successfully argued appeals in courts around the country.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean also has a nationally prominent reputation for his work in the consumer protection area, where he has particularly deep experience handling FTC investigations and associated litigation focused on advertising, marketing, privacy, and data security issues. In 2018-19, for example, Sean served as lead counsel for Facebook in connection with the FTC\u0026rsquo;s extensive privacy-related investigation and subsequent settlement. He brings to this area of his practice deep knowledge of applicable law and agency practice, as well as the skills of an accomplished litigator.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor well more than a decade, Sean has been given a Band 1 ranking by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(2007-2025)\u003cem\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewhich has described him as \u0026ldquo;top of the field,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;a star in the antitrust world both in counseling and litigation,\u0026rdquo; and an \u0026ldquo;extremely talented lawyer and exceptional litigator.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean\u0026rsquo;s other recognitions include being ranked in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers Global\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for Antitrust \u0026ndash; USA (2020-2023); endorsed as \u0026ldquo;Highly Recommended (Texas)\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGlobal Competition Review\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2025); named a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Star\u0026rdquo; for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2023). He is named by \u003cem\u003eLexology\u003c/em\u003e as a \"Competition Thought Leader\" (2025);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;The Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \u0026ldquo;Antitrust Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; (2015, 2018); and \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \u0026ldquo;Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; (2019). He has also been named to the \u0026ldquo;All-Star List\u0026rdquo; by BTI Services (2017) and deemed a \u0026ldquo;National Antitrust MVP\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2015); a \u0026ldquo;Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer\u0026rdquo; by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2015); and a \u0026ldquo;Life Sciences Star\u0026rdquo; in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018\u0026ndash;2019) by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLMG Life Sciences\u003c/em\u003e. For the fourth year in a row, Sean was also named by \u003cem\u003eLawdragon \u003c/em\u003eas one of the \"500 Leading Litigators in America.\"\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSean has written extensively on a wide range of topics relevant to, among other things, antitrust law and policy, consumer protection, privacy, FTC process and remedies, class action antitrust litigation, pharmaceutical antitrust, and standard setting. Sean previously served as Editorial Chair of the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, and as an editor of the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;magazine and of the Von Kalinowski treatise on\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Laws and Trade Regulation\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;A Google Breakup Would Serve Progressive Aims and Punish Business,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eBloomberg Law\u003c/em\u003e, October 5, 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s Punctuated Equilibrium,\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s COPPA Conundrum: Ambiguities in the Rule and a Dearth of Authoritative Guidance Leave the Agency Vulnerable to Legal Challenges\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, September 9, 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor, \u0026ldquo;Antitrust and Consumer Protection at Last Converge,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCorporate Counsel\u003c/em\u003e, April 27, 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;CFPB May Fill Enforcement Gap After FTC\u0026rsquo;s High Court Loss,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e, May 6, 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;By the Numbers: 5 Practices That Could Drive Big Law in 2021,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBloomberg Law\u003c/em\u003e, December 23, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuoted in, \u0026ldquo;\u0026lsquo;Hipster Antitrust\u0026rsquo; Comes for Joe Biden,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNew York Times\u003c/em\u003e, November 13, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;A Watershed Moment? What Comes Next for the FTC in the Wake of AMG,\u0026rdquo;\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;ABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, August 9, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Intersection of Antitrust and the False Claims Act,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHeadnotes\u003c/em\u003e, Dallas Bar Association, June 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Unpacking the New FTC/DOJ Draft Vertical Merger Guidelines,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, March 9, 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Seventh Circuit Sets Up Potential Supreme Court Review of FTC Monetary Relief Authority,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, December 12, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Next Stop, Supreme Court? Seventh Circuit Goes Its Own Way on FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, September 3, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Taking Stock of FTC Cybersecurity Enforcement After the Equifax Settlement,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, August 7, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Ninth Circuit Judges Call for En Banc Review of FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, January 15, 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCo-author, \u0026ldquo;Lessons from FTC\u0026rsquo;s Loss in, and Subsequent Abandonment of, DirecTV Advertising Case,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, October 23, 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCo-author, \u0026ldquo;Are Disgorgement\u0026rsquo;s Days Numbered?\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eKokesh v. SEC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;May Foreshadow Curtailment of the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Will\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eKokesh v. FTC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Put a Kink in the Federal Trade Commission\u0026rsquo;s Disgorgement Hose?\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWLF Legal Pulse\u003c/em\u003e, July 10, 2017.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Antitrust Scrutiny of Pharmaceutical Product Hopping,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Fall 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;When Mergers Become a Private Matter: An Updated Antitrust Primer,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Evaluating Mergers Between Potential Competitors Under the New Horizontal Merger Guidelines,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Fall 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Complexities of Litigating Generic Drug Exclusion Claims in the Antitrust Class Action Context,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Spring 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Change?: Merger Enforcement in the New Administration,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Advocate\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Deterring \u0026lsquo;Patent Ambush\u0026rsquo; in Standard Setting: Lessons from Rambus and Qualcomm,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The FTC\u0026rsquo;s N-Data Consent Order: A Missed Opportunity to Clarify Antitrust in Standard Setting,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eABA Antitrust Magazine\u003c/em\u003e, Summer 2008.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Avoiding the Scarlet \u0026lsquo;S\u0026rsquo;: The Modern Challenges of Document Preservation and Destruction,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, June 2005.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Art of Destruction,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, September 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Standard Setting and Exclusionary Conduct: The Role of Antitrust in Policing Unilateral Abuses of a Standard-Setting Process,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e, 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Administrative Litigation at the FTC: Past, Present, and Future,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2003.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Noerr Immunity for Sponsoring Litigation: From Burlington Northern to Baltimore Scrap,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust\u003c/em\u003e, 2001.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Coping with the Antitrust Risks of Technological Integration,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2000.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Disaggregation\u0026nbsp;of Antitrust Damages,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 1997.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Post-Chicago Economics,\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntitrust Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 1995.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLitigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Represented Forest Labs. and affiliates in this still-ongoing indirect purchaser antitrust class action involving allegations of \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo; and a challenged \u0026ldquo;reverse payment\u0026rdquo; patent settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Restasis Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this consolidated MDL antitrust class action involving complex patent- and FDA-related monopolization claims predicated on allegations of delayed entry of generic drugs. Cases settled favorably for defendants after class certification and summary judgment briefing and arguments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. ex rel. Silbersher v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this False Claims Act litigation in which a private relator sought to assert claims of alleged fraud against the government predicated on a patent-related theory and assertions of delayed generic drug entry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re JUUL Labs., Inc. Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel in this still-ongoing consolidated MDL antitrust class action challenging an allegedly unlawful agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in this suit in which DOJ asserted that AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s DirecTV unit engaged in improper coordination and information sharing relating to pay TV distributors\u0026rsquo; negotiations with the provider of sports-related television content; case settled on highly favorable terms after full briefing of AT\u0026amp;T\u0026rsquo;s motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFTC v. Lending Club\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Lending Club in this suit in which the FTC asserted multiple consumer protection-based claims relating to Lending Club\u0026rsquo;s marketing and advertising practices and privacy-related compliance; argued summary and obtained partial victories; case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.D.C. \u0026amp; D.C. Cir.) \u0026ndash; Played an important role on the trial team in this landmark case in which AT\u0026amp;T defeated a DOJ antitrust challenge to the company\u0026rsquo;s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner, an outcome that was later affirmed on appeal in the D.C. Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSureShot v. Topgolf\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D. Tex. \u0026amp; 5th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Topgolf in this antitrust suit asserting monopolization claims; obtained full dismissal of all claims by district court and unanimous affirmance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCipla v. Amgen\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Amgen in this monopolization suit brought by a generic drug competitor; argued preliminary injunction motion and participated in later interlocutory appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eShire v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. N.J.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit involving alleged bundling and exclusive dealing practices; argued successful motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHartig v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this putative antitrust class action asserting that Allergan delayed generic entry through alleged \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo;; argued successful motion to dismiss and later defended that ruling through oral argument before the Third Circuit; case was settled on highly favorable terms after remand to district court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eApotex v. Allergan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit predicated on claims of unlawful \u0026ldquo;product hopping\u0026rdquo;; obtained highly favorable settlement after the close of fact and expert discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this competitor monopolization suit asserting patent- and FDA-related antitrust claims; successfully argued for dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. ex rel. Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this suit in which a competing generic drug company, having had its own antitrust claims dismissed, sought to assert related False Claims Act claims as a purported relator; case was fully dismissed by the district court and the outcome was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFTC v. Commerce Planet\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Represented former Commerce Planet CEO in this FTC consumer protection suit in which the client, represented by prior counsel, was subjected to a judgment with significant personal liability.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStanwood v. Mary Kay Cosmetics\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Mary Kay in this putative class action case alleging fraud and unfair competition relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s prior participation in industry pledge not to conduct animal-based testing; obtained full dismissal of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAvery Dennison v. 3M Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Minn.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for 3M in this competitor suit alleging that 3M monopolized markets through wrongful patent-related conduct in the context of industry standard-setting activities; case settled on highly favorable terms following the close of fact and expert discovery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Pa.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead counsel for Biovail in this antitrust class action alleging patent-related monopolization and conspiracy claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTodd v. Exxon, et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(S.D.N.Y.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for Phillips Petroleum in this putative antitrust class action alleging conspiracy claims based on asserted improper sharing of salary and benefits information.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNeon Systems v. BMC Software\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Tex. Civ.) \u0026ndash; Served as lead antitrust counsel for BMC Software in this competitor suit alleging that BMC had monopolized markets through unlawful pricing and bundling practices; case settled favorably shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAtlantic Coast Airlines v. Mesa Airlines\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D.D.C.) \u0026ndash; Served as trial counsel for Atlantic Coast Airlines in this successful antitrust action obtaining a preliminary injunction barring United Airlines and Mesa Airlines from proceeding with a contemplated business arrangement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eContinental Forge v. Sempra Energy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Sup. Ct. Cal.) \u0026ndash; Represented Sempra Energy and affiliates in this suit alleging antitrust conspiracy claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLonghorn Partners Pipeline Co. v. Holly Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash; Represented Holly Corp. in this antitrust suit alleging monopolization of West Texas petroleum pipelines.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. AMR Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Kansas) \u0026ndash; Represented American Airlines and parent AMR in this government antitrust suit alleging predatory pricing; case resolved through summary judgment for defendants.*\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLitton Systems v. Honeywell\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(C.D. Cal. \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) \u0026ndash; Represented Honeywell in this competitor monopolization suit alleging that Honeywell improperly excluded competition in the market for commercial avionics systems; successfully argued motion for directed verdict on majority of claims at issue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eContinental Airlines v. American Airlines\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D. Tex.) \u0026ndash;Represented American Airlines in this suit alleging improper predatory pricing relating to American\u0026rsquo;s introduction of a new fare structure; obtained favorable jury verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGovernment Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKurbo/WW Inc. \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for WW International and affiliate Kurbo in connection with FTC privacy (COPPA) investigation and settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eGoogle/Fitbit \u0026ndash; Counsel for Fitbit in connection with DOJ investigation of Google\u0026rsquo;s successful US$2.1 billion acquisition of Fitbit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAT\u0026amp;T/Time Warner \u0026ndash; Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAT\u0026amp;T/DirecTV \u0026ndash; Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$48 billion acquisition of DirecTV.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFacebook \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Facebook in connection with FTC investigation relating to compliance with prior 2012 consent order prescribing certain privacy-related standards and practices; also lead counsel for the company in connection with the prior 2012 FTC privacy investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eBazaarvoice \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Bazaarvoice relating to DOJ antitrust and order compliance investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTicketmaster/LiveNation \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Ticketmaster in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s US$2.5 billion acquisition of LiveNation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWilliams Cos. \u0026ndash; Lead antitrust counsel for Williams in connection with proposed US$38 billion acquisition by Energy Transfer Equity LP.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLeon Max/Max Studios \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Max Studios in connection with FTC investigation of asserted violations of prior FTC consent order imposing restrictions on advertising of textile content of retail garments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eValueClick \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for ValueClick in connection with FTC consumer protection claims involving various privacy and online advertising issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAllergan \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Allergan in connection with FTC investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$3.2 billion acquisition of Inamed Corp.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWatson Wyatt \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Watson Wyatt in connection with DOJ investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful US$3.5 billion acquisition of Towers Perrin.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eUnited Defense \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for United Defense in DOJ investigation of BAe\u0026rsquo;s successful US$4.2 billion acquisition of UDI.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAncestry.com \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Ancestry.com in connection with FTC investigation of the company\u0026rsquo;s successful acquisition of Archive.com.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eEndocare \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Endocare in connection with FTC investigation of proposed merger with Galil Medical.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDiedrichCoffee \u0026ndash; Lead counsel for Diedrich in FTC investigation of successful merger with Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eNumerous other representations as lead counsel in non-public government investigations, including many FTC consumer protection matters, where successful results leading to closures of the investigations caused them to remain non-public matters.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked Band 1 for Antitrust, Texas","detail":"Chambers USA, 2007–2023"},{"title":"Top ranked for Antitrust USA","detail":"Chambers Global, 2020–2023"},{"title":"Named a “Litigation Star” for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023"},{"title":"Named “Highly Recommended (Texas)”","detail":"Global Competition Review, 2022"},{"title":"Named “Life Sciences Star” in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018–2019)","detail":"LMG Life Sciences"},{"title":"Named as one of “500 Leading Litigators in America”","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022 and 2024"},{"title":"Listed","detail":"Who’s Who Legal in Competition, 2021"},{"title":"Named “Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2019"},{"title":"Named “Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2015 and 2018"},{"title":"Listed in “All-Star List”","detail":"BTI Services, 2017"},{"title":"Named “Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer”","detail":"National Law Journal, 2015"},{"title":"Named “National Antitrust MVP”","detail":"Law360, 2015"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11010}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-08-27T18:44:30.000Z","updated_at":"2025-08-27T18:44:30.000Z","searchable_text":"Royall{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked Band 1 for Antitrust, Texas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2007–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top ranked for Antitrust USA\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global, 2020–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a “Litigation Star” for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Highly Recommended (Texas)”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Global Competition Review, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Life Sciences Star” in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018–2019)\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LMG Life Sciences\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as one of “500 Leading Litigators in America”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2022 and 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Listed\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal in Competition, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Antitrust Lawyer of the Year”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, 2015 and 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Listed in “All-Star List”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BTI Services, 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"National Law Journal, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named “National Antitrust MVP”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}Litigation\nIn re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.) – Represented Forest Labs. and affiliates in this still-ongoing indirect purchaser antitrust class action involving allegations of “product hopping” and a challenged “reverse payment” patent settlement.{{ FIELD }}In re Restasis Antitrust Litigation (E.D.N.Y.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this consolidated MDL antitrust class action involving complex patent- and FDA-related monopolization claims predicated on allegations of delayed entry of generic drugs. Cases settled favorably for defendants after class certification and summary judgment briefing and arguments.{{ FIELD }}U.S. ex rel. Silbersher v. Allergan (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this False Claims Act litigation in which a private relator sought to assert claims of alleged fraud against the government predicated on a patent-related theory and assertions of delayed generic drug entry.{{ FIELD }}In re JUUL Labs., Inc. Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel in this still-ongoing consolidated MDL antitrust class action challenging an allegedly unlawful agreement.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in this suit in which DOJ asserted that AT\u0026amp;T’s DirecTV unit engaged in improper coordination and information sharing relating to pay TV distributors’ negotiations with the provider of sports-related television content; case settled on highly favorable terms after full briefing of AT\u0026amp;T’s motion to dismiss.{{ FIELD }}FTC v. Lending Club (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Lending Club in this suit in which the FTC asserted multiple consumer protection-based claims relating to Lending Club’s marketing and advertising practices and privacy-related compliance; argued summary and obtained partial victories; case settled favorably.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T (D.D.C. \u0026amp; D.C. Cir.) – Played an important role on the trial team in this landmark case in which AT\u0026amp;T defeated a DOJ antitrust challenge to the company’s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner, an outcome that was later affirmed on appeal in the D.C. Circuit.{{ FIELD }}SureShot v. Topgolf (S.D. Tex. \u0026amp; 5th Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Topgolf in this antitrust suit asserting monopolization claims; obtained full dismissal of all claims by district court and unanimous affirmance.{{ FIELD }}Cipla v. Amgen (D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Amgen in this monopolization suit brought by a generic drug competitor; argued preliminary injunction motion and participated in later interlocutory appeal.{{ FIELD }}Shire v. Allergan (D. N.J.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit involving alleged bundling and exclusive dealing practices; argued successful motion to dismiss.{{ FIELD }}Hartig v. Allergan (D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this putative antitrust class action asserting that Allergan delayed generic entry through alleged “product hopping”; argued successful motion to dismiss and later defended that ruling through oral argument before the Third Circuit; case was settled on highly favorable terms after remand to district court.{{ FIELD }}Apotex v. Allergan (D. Del.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit predicated on claims of unlawful “product hopping”; obtained highly favorable settlement after the close of fact and expert discovery.{{ FIELD }}Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this competitor monopolization suit asserting patent- and FDA-related antitrust claims; successfully argued for dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}U.S. ex rel. Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis (C.D. Cal \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this suit in which a competing generic drug company, having had its own antitrust claims dismissed, sought to assert related False Claims Act claims as a purported relator; case was fully dismissed by the district court and the outcome was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.{{ FIELD }}FTC v. Commerce Planet (9th Cir.) – Represented former Commerce Planet CEO in this FTC consumer protection suit in which the client, represented by prior counsel, was subjected to a judgment with significant personal liability.{{ FIELD }}Stanwood v. Mary Kay Cosmetics (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Mary Kay in this putative class action case alleging fraud and unfair competition relating to the company’s prior participation in industry pledge not to conduct animal-based testing; obtained full dismissal of all claims.{{ FIELD }}Avery Dennison v. 3M Corp. (D. Minn.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for 3M in this competitor suit alleging that 3M monopolized markets through wrongful patent-related conduct in the context of industry standard-setting activities; case settled on highly favorable terms following the close of fact and expert discovery.{{ FIELD }}In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.) – Served as lead counsel for Biovail in this antitrust class action alleging patent-related monopolization and conspiracy claims.{{ FIELD }}Todd v. Exxon, et al. (S.D.N.Y.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for Phillips Petroleum in this putative antitrust class action alleging conspiracy claims based on asserted improper sharing of salary and benefits information.{{ FIELD }}Neon Systems v. BMC Software (Tex. Civ.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for BMC Software in this competitor suit alleging that BMC had monopolized markets through unlawful pricing and bundling practices; case settled favorably shortly before trial.{{ FIELD }}Atlantic Coast Airlines v. Mesa Airlines (D.D.C.) – Served as trial counsel for Atlantic Coast Airlines in this successful antitrust action obtaining a preliminary injunction barring United Airlines and Mesa Airlines from proceeding with a contemplated business arrangement.{{ FIELD }}Continental Forge v. Sempra Energy (Sup. Ct. Cal.) – Represented Sempra Energy and affiliates in this suit alleging antitrust conspiracy claims.{{ FIELD }}Longhorn Partners Pipeline Co. v. Holly Corp. (W.D. Tex.) – Represented Holly Corp. in this antitrust suit alleging monopolization of West Texas petroleum pipelines.{{ FIELD }}U.S. v. AMR Corp. (D. Kansas) – Represented American Airlines and parent AMR in this government antitrust suit alleging predatory pricing; case resolved through summary judgment for defendants.*{{ FIELD }}Litton Systems v. Honeywell (C.D. Cal. \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) – Represented Honeywell in this competitor monopolization suit alleging that Honeywell improperly excluded competition in the market for commercial avionics systems; successfully argued motion for directed verdict on majority of claims at issue.{{ FIELD }}Continental Airlines v. American Airlines (S.D. Tex.) –Represented American Airlines in this suit alleging improper predatory pricing relating to American’s introduction of a new fare structure; obtained favorable jury verdict.{{ FIELD }}Government Investigations\nKurbo/WW Inc. – Lead counsel for WW International and affiliate Kurbo in connection with FTC privacy (COPPA) investigation and settlement.{{ FIELD }}Google/Fitbit – Counsel for Fitbit in connection with DOJ investigation of Google’s successful US$2.1 billion acquisition of Fitbit.{{ FIELD }}AT\u0026amp;T/Time Warner – Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.{{ FIELD }}AT\u0026amp;T/DirecTV – Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$48 billion acquisition of DirecTV.{{ FIELD }}Facebook – Lead counsel for Facebook in connection with FTC investigation relating to compliance with prior 2012 consent order prescribing certain privacy-related standards and practices; also lead counsel for the company in connection with the prior 2012 FTC privacy investigation.{{ FIELD }}Bazaarvoice – Lead counsel for Bazaarvoice relating to DOJ antitrust and order compliance investigations.{{ FIELD }}Ticketmaster/LiveNation – Lead counsel for Ticketmaster in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s US$2.5 billion acquisition of LiveNation.{{ FIELD }}Williams Cos. – Lead antitrust counsel for Williams in connection with proposed US$38 billion acquisition by Energy Transfer Equity LP.{{ FIELD }}Leon Max/Max Studios – Lead counsel for Max Studios in connection with FTC investigation of asserted violations of prior FTC consent order imposing restrictions on advertising of textile content of retail garments.{{ FIELD }}ValueClick – Lead counsel for ValueClick in connection with FTC consumer protection claims involving various privacy and online advertising issues.{{ FIELD }}Allergan – Lead counsel for Allergan in connection with FTC investigation of the company’s successful US$3.2 billion acquisition of Inamed Corp.{{ FIELD }}Watson Wyatt – Lead counsel for Watson Wyatt in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$3.5 billion acquisition of Towers Perrin.{{ FIELD }}United Defense – Lead counsel for United Defense in DOJ investigation of BAe’s successful US$4.2 billion acquisition of UDI.{{ FIELD }}Ancestry.com – Lead counsel for Ancestry.com in connection with FTC investigation of the company’s successful acquisition of Archive.com.{{ FIELD }}Endocare – Lead counsel for Endocare in connection with FTC investigation of proposed merger with Galil Medical.{{ FIELD }}DiedrichCoffee – Lead counsel for Diedrich in FTC investigation of successful merger with Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.{{ FIELD }}Numerous other representations as lead counsel in non-public government investigations, including many FTC consumer protection matters, where successful results leading to closures of the investigations caused them to remain non-public matters.{{ FIELD }}Sean Royall serves as the firm’s Global Practice Head for Antitrust and Consumer Protection. He has spent his entire career handling complex litigation matters and government investigations and is among the country’s most experienced and highly regarded antitrust lawyers. He focuses broadly on antitrust and consumer protection litigation, government investigations, and counseling, and is a highly experienced courtroom litigator with a stellar track record for winning high-stakes cases. Sean is equally effective navigating complex government investigations and advising clients on the details of a wide range of strategic antitrust and consumer protection issues.\nSean previously served at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as the Deputy Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. His antitrust career, both in government and private practice, has included work on many major mergers and acquisitions, as well as lead roles in complex litigation matters that often intersect with other areas of law, including patent law, various federal regulatory regimes, consumer protection, and privacy. Sean has deep experience representing clients across a range of industries, including biopharma, healthcare, e-commerce, telecom, financial services, energy, transportation, software, and semiconductors. In addition to his work on U.S. antitrust and consumer protection matters, Sean has worked and advised on many similar cases and investigations in Europe and other parts of the world.\nWhile in government, Sean was the lead trial lawyer in the FTC’s landmark monopolization suit against computer chip maker Rambus Inc., a novel case that established new legal standards applicable to patent disclosure within industry standard-setting consortiums. More recently, Sean played an important role on the trial team for AT\u0026amp;T in the company’s victory over the Department of Justice’s antitrust challenge to AT\u0026amp;T’s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner. In addition to his trial experience, Sean has successfully argued appeals in courts around the country.\nSean also has a nationally prominent reputation for his work in the consumer protection area, where he has particularly deep experience handling FTC investigations and associated litigation focused on advertising, marketing, privacy, and data security issues. In 2018-19, for example, Sean served as lead counsel for Facebook in connection with the FTC’s extensive privacy-related investigation and subsequent settlement. He brings to this area of his practice deep knowledge of applicable law and agency practice, as well as the skills of an accomplished litigator. \nFor well more than a decade, Sean has been given a Band 1 ranking by Chambers USA (2007-2025), which has described him as “top of the field,” “a star in the antitrust world both in counseling and litigation,” and an “extremely talented lawyer and exceptional litigator.”\nSean’s other recognitions include being ranked in Chambers Global for Antitrust – USA (2020-2023); endorsed as “Highly Recommended (Texas)” by Global Competition Review (2025); named a “Litigation Star” for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work by Benchmark Litigation (2023). He is named by Lexology as a \"Competition Thought Leader\" (2025);  The Best Lawyers in America as “Antitrust Lawyer of the Year” (2015, 2018); and The Best Lawyers in America as “Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year” (2019). He has also been named to the “All-Star List” by BTI Services (2017) and deemed a “National Antitrust MVP” by Law360 (2015); a “Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer” by National Law Journal (2015); and a “Life Sciences Star” in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018–2019) by LMG Life Sciences. For the fourth year in a row, Sean was also named by Lawdragon as one of the \"500 Leading Litigators in America.\"\nPublications\nSean has written extensively on a wide range of topics relevant to, among other things, antitrust law and policy, consumer protection, privacy, FTC process and remedies, class action antitrust litigation, pharmaceutical antitrust, and standard setting. Sean previously served as Editorial Chair of the ABA’s Antitrust Law Journal, and as an editor of the ABA’s Antitrust magazine and of the Von Kalinowski treatise on Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation.\n\nAuthor, “A Google Breakup Would Serve Progressive Aims and Punish Business,” Bloomberg Law, October 5, 2023.\nAuthor, “The FTC’s Punctuated Equilibrium,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, September 2023.\nAuthor, “The FTC’s COPPA Conundrum: Ambiguities in the Rule and a Dearth of Authoritative Guidance Leave the Agency Vulnerable to Legal Challenges” ABA Antitrust Magazine, September 9, 2022.\nAuthor, “Antitrust and Consumer Protection at Last Converge,” Corporate Counsel, April 27, 2022.\nQuoted in, “CFPB May Fill Enforcement Gap After FTC’s High Court Loss,” Law360, May 6, 2021.\nQuoted in, “By the Numbers: 5 Practices That Could Drive Big Law in 2021,” Bloomberg Law, December 23, 2020.\nQuoted in, “‘Hipster Antitrust’ Comes for Joe Biden,” New York Times, November 13, 2020.\n“A Watershed Moment? What Comes Next for the FTC in the Wake of AMG,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, August 9, 2020.\n“The Intersection of Antitrust and the False Claims Act,” Headnotes, Dallas Bar Association, June 2020.\n“Unpacking the New FTC/DOJ Draft Vertical Merger Guidelines,” WLF Legal Pulse, March 9, 2020.\n“Seventh Circuit Sets Up Potential Supreme Court Review of FTC Monetary Relief Authority,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, December 12, 2019.\n“Next Stop, Supreme Court? Seventh Circuit Goes Its Own Way on FTC’s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,” WLF Legal Pulse, September 3, 2019.\n“Taking Stock of FTC Cybersecurity Enforcement After the Equifax Settlement,” WLF Legal Pulse, August 7, 2019.\n“Ninth Circuit Judges Call for En Banc Review of FTC’s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,” WLF Legal Pulse, January 15, 2019.\nCo-author, “Lessons from FTC’s Loss in, and Subsequent Abandonment of, DirecTV Advertising Case,” WLF Legal Pulse, October 23, 2018.\nCo-author, “Are Disgorgement’s Days Numbered? Kokesh v. SEC May Foreshadow Curtailment of the FTC’s Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Spring 2018.\n“Will Kokesh v. FTC Put a Kink in the Federal Trade Commission’s Disgorgement Hose?” WLF Legal Pulse, July 10, 2017.\n“Antitrust Scrutiny of Pharmaceutical Product Hopping,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Fall 2013.\n“When Mergers Become a Private Matter: An Updated Antitrust Primer,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Spring 2012.\n“Evaluating Mergers Between Potential Competitors Under the New Horizontal Merger Guidelines,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Fall 2010.\n“The Complexities of Litigating Generic Drug Exclusion Claims in the Antitrust Class Action Context,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Spring 2010.\n“Change?: Merger Enforcement in the New Administration,” The Advocate, Summer 2009.\n“Deterring ‘Patent Ambush’ in Standard Setting: Lessons from Rambus and Qualcomm,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Summer 2009.\n“The FTC’s N-Data Consent Order: A Missed Opportunity to Clarify Antitrust in Standard Setting,” ABA Antitrust Magazine, Summer 2008.\n“Avoiding the Scarlet ‘S’: The Modern Challenges of Document Preservation and Destruction,” The American Lawyer, June 2005.\n“The Art of Destruction,” The American Lawyer, September 2004.\n“Standard Setting and Exclusionary Conduct: The Role of Antitrust in Policing Unilateral Abuses of a Standard-Setting Process,” Antitrust, 2004.\n“Administrative Litigation at the FTC: Past, Present, and Future,” Antitrust Law Journal, 2003.\n“Noerr Immunity for Sponsoring Litigation: From Burlington Northern to Baltimore Scrap,” Antitrust, 2001.\n“Coping with the Antitrust Risks of Technological Integration,” Antitrust Law Journal, 2000.\n“Disaggregation of Antitrust Damages,” Antitrust Law Journal, 1997.\n“Post-Chicago Economics,” Antitrust Law Journal, 1995.\n Partner Ranked Band 1 for Antitrust, Texas Chambers USA, 2007–2023 Top ranked for Antitrust USA Chambers Global, 2020–2023 Named a “Litigation Star” for Intellectual Property, Competition/Antitrust, Appellate, and Commercial work Benchmark Litigation, 2023 Named “Highly Recommended (Texas)” Global Competition Review, 2022 Named “Life Sciences Star” in Antitrust (2022) and Competition and Antitrust (2018–2019) LMG Life Sciences Named as one of “500 Leading Litigators in America” Lawdragon, 2022 and 2024 Listed Who’s Who Legal in Competition, 2021 Named “Litigation: Antitrust Lawyer of the Year” The Best Lawyers in America, 2019 Named “Antitrust Lawyer of the Year” The Best Lawyers in America, 2015 and 2018 Listed in “All-Star List” BTI Services, 2017 Named “Mergers and Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer” National Law Journal, 2015 Named “National Antitrust MVP” Law360, 2015 Texas A\u0026amp;M University Texas A\u0026amp;M School of Law University of Chicago University of Chicago Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas District of Columbia Texas Senior Courts of England and Wales Current Practicing Certificate in Victoria (Australia) Judicial Clerk, Patrick E. Higginbotham, U.S Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Litigation\nIn re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.) – Represented Forest Labs. and affiliates in this still-ongoing indirect purchaser antitrust class action involving allegations of “product hopping” and a challenged “reverse payment” patent settlement. In re Restasis Antitrust Litigation (E.D.N.Y.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this consolidated MDL antitrust class action involving complex patent- and FDA-related monopolization claims predicated on allegations of delayed entry of generic drugs. Cases settled favorably for defendants after class certification and summary judgment briefing and arguments. U.S. ex rel. Silbersher v. Allergan (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this False Claims Act litigation in which a private relator sought to assert claims of alleged fraud against the government predicated on a patent-related theory and assertions of delayed generic drug entry. In re JUUL Labs., Inc. Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel in this still-ongoing consolidated MDL antitrust class action challenging an allegedly unlawful agreement. U.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in this suit in which DOJ asserted that AT\u0026amp;T’s DirecTV unit engaged in improper coordination and information sharing relating to pay TV distributors’ negotiations with the provider of sports-related television content; case settled on highly favorable terms after full briefing of AT\u0026amp;T’s motion to dismiss. FTC v. Lending Club (N.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Lending Club in this suit in which the FTC asserted multiple consumer protection-based claims relating to Lending Club’s marketing and advertising practices and privacy-related compliance; argued summary and obtained partial victories; case settled favorably. U.S. v. AT\u0026amp;T (D.D.C. \u0026amp; D.C. Cir.) – Played an important role on the trial team in this landmark case in which AT\u0026amp;T defeated a DOJ antitrust challenge to the company’s US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner, an outcome that was later affirmed on appeal in the D.C. Circuit. SureShot v. Topgolf (S.D. Tex. \u0026amp; 5th Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Topgolf in this antitrust suit asserting monopolization claims; obtained full dismissal of all claims by district court and unanimous affirmance. Cipla v. Amgen (D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Amgen in this monopolization suit brought by a generic drug competitor; argued preliminary injunction motion and participated in later interlocutory appeal. Shire v. Allergan (D. N.J.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit involving alleged bundling and exclusive dealing practices; argued successful motion to dismiss. Hartig v. Allergan (D. Del. \u0026amp; 3d Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this putative antitrust class action asserting that Allergan delayed generic entry through alleged “product hopping”; argued successful motion to dismiss and later defended that ruling through oral argument before the Third Circuit; case was settled on highly favorable terms after remand to district court. Apotex v. Allergan (D. Del.) – Served as lead counsel for Allergan in this competitor monopolization suit predicated on claims of unlawful “product hopping”; obtained highly favorable settlement after the close of fact and expert discovery. Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this competitor monopolization suit asserting patent- and FDA-related antitrust claims; successfully argued for dismissal of all claims. U.S. ex rel. Amphastar v. Sanofi-Aventis (C.D. Cal \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) – Served as lead counsel for Sanofi in this suit in which a competing generic drug company, having had its own antitrust claims dismissed, sought to assert related False Claims Act claims as a purported relator; case was fully dismissed by the district court and the outcome was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. FTC v. Commerce Planet (9th Cir.) – Represented former Commerce Planet CEO in this FTC consumer protection suit in which the client, represented by prior counsel, was subjected to a judgment with significant personal liability. Stanwood v. Mary Kay Cosmetics (C.D. Cal.) – Served as lead counsel for Mary Kay in this putative class action case alleging fraud and unfair competition relating to the company’s prior participation in industry pledge not to conduct animal-based testing; obtained full dismissal of all claims. Avery Dennison v. 3M Corp. (D. Minn.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for 3M in this competitor suit alleging that 3M monopolized markets through wrongful patent-related conduct in the context of industry standard-setting activities; case settled on highly favorable terms following the close of fact and expert discovery. In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.) – Served as lead counsel for Biovail in this antitrust class action alleging patent-related monopolization and conspiracy claims. Todd v. Exxon, et al. (S.D.N.Y.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for Phillips Petroleum in this putative antitrust class action alleging conspiracy claims based on asserted improper sharing of salary and benefits information. Neon Systems v. BMC Software (Tex. Civ.) – Served as lead antitrust counsel for BMC Software in this competitor suit alleging that BMC had monopolized markets through unlawful pricing and bundling practices; case settled favorably shortly before trial. Atlantic Coast Airlines v. Mesa Airlines (D.D.C.) – Served as trial counsel for Atlantic Coast Airlines in this successful antitrust action obtaining a preliminary injunction barring United Airlines and Mesa Airlines from proceeding with a contemplated business arrangement. Continental Forge v. Sempra Energy (Sup. Ct. Cal.) – Represented Sempra Energy and affiliates in this suit alleging antitrust conspiracy claims. Longhorn Partners Pipeline Co. v. Holly Corp. (W.D. Tex.) – Represented Holly Corp. in this antitrust suit alleging monopolization of West Texas petroleum pipelines. U.S. v. AMR Corp. (D. Kansas) – Represented American Airlines and parent AMR in this government antitrust suit alleging predatory pricing; case resolved through summary judgment for defendants.* Litton Systems v. Honeywell (C.D. Cal. \u0026amp; 9th Cir.) – Represented Honeywell in this competitor monopolization suit alleging that Honeywell improperly excluded competition in the market for commercial avionics systems; successfully argued motion for directed verdict on majority of claims at issue. Continental Airlines v. American Airlines (S.D. Tex.) –Represented American Airlines in this suit alleging improper predatory pricing relating to American’s introduction of a new fare structure; obtained favorable jury verdict. Government Investigations\nKurbo/WW Inc. – Lead counsel for WW International and affiliate Kurbo in connection with FTC privacy (COPPA) investigation and settlement. Google/Fitbit – Counsel for Fitbit in connection with DOJ investigation of Google’s successful US$2.1 billion acquisition of Fitbit. AT\u0026amp;T/Time Warner – Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$85 billion acquisition of Time Warner. AT\u0026amp;T/DirecTV – Counsel for AT\u0026amp;T in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$48 billion acquisition of DirecTV. Facebook – Lead counsel for Facebook in connection with FTC investigation relating to compliance with prior 2012 consent order prescribing certain privacy-related standards and practices; also lead counsel for the company in connection with the prior 2012 FTC privacy investigation. Bazaarvoice – Lead counsel for Bazaarvoice relating to DOJ antitrust and order compliance investigations. Ticketmaster/LiveNation – Lead counsel for Ticketmaster in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s US$2.5 billion acquisition of LiveNation. Williams Cos. – Lead antitrust counsel for Williams in connection with proposed US$38 billion acquisition by Energy Transfer Equity LP. Leon Max/Max Studios – Lead counsel for Max Studios in connection with FTC investigation of asserted violations of prior FTC consent order imposing restrictions on advertising of textile content of retail garments. ValueClick – Lead counsel for ValueClick in connection with FTC consumer protection claims involving various privacy and online advertising issues. Allergan – Lead counsel for Allergan in connection with FTC investigation of the company’s successful US$3.2 billion acquisition of Inamed Corp. Watson Wyatt – Lead counsel for Watson Wyatt in connection with DOJ investigation of the company’s successful US$3.5 billion acquisition of Towers Perrin. United Defense – Lead counsel for United Defense in DOJ investigation of BAe’s successful US$4.2 billion acquisition of UDI. Ancestry.com – Lead counsel for Ancestry.com in connection with FTC investigation of the company’s successful acquisition of Archive.com. Endocare – Lead counsel for Endocare in connection with FTC investigation of proposed merger with Galil Medical. DiedrichCoffee – Lead counsel for Diedrich in FTC investigation of successful merger with Green Mountain Coffee Roasters. Numerous other representations as lead counsel in non-public government investigations, including many FTC consumer protection matters, where successful results leading to closures of the investigations caused them to remain non-public matters.","searchable_name":"M. Sean Royall","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}]}}