Deepak Gupta
202.888.1741 | 1900 L Street, NW, Suite 312, Washington, DC 20036
Legal Assistant: Abigail Cipparone

Deepak Gupta is the founder of Gupta Wessler, a public-interest law firm that acts as a counterweight to the corporate dominance of the Supreme Court and appellate bar. Deepak has focused his two-decade legal career on ensuring access to justice for people—particularly for consumers, workers, and communities injured by corporate or governmental wrongdoing. In addition to individual and class plaintiffs, Deepak represents and collaborates with labor unions; civil rights, consumer, environmental, and good-government advocacy groups; state and local governments; and public officials.

Deepak also teaches at Harvard Law School, where he is a Lecturer on Law and was a Wasserstein Public Interest Fellow. He has previously taught appellate advocacy and public interest advocacy as an adjunct law professor at Georgetown and American universities and frequently lectures on civil rights litigation at Howard University.

Deepak is “known as a skilled appellate lawyer” (New York Times) and “an all-star progressive Supreme Court litigator” (Washington Post). He’s been described as “one of the emerging giants of the appellate and the Supreme Court bar,” a “heavy hitter,” a “principled” and “incredibly talented lawyer” (Law 360), and “a progressive legal rock star.” (New York Law Journal). Chambers USA cites his “impressive” and “highly rated appellate practice,” describing him as “an incredible oral advocate” who “writes terrific briefs” and maintains a “vibrant appellate practice focused on public interest cases and plaintiff-side representations.” For the past several years, Washingtonian magazine has ranked Deepak as one of the “Best Lawyers” for Supreme Court cases; he is the only non-corporate lawyer on that list. Fastcase honored Deepak as “one of the country’s top litigators,” noting that “what sets him apart” is his legal creativity. And the National Law Journal has singled out Deepak’s “calm, comfortable manner that conveys confidence” in oral argument.

Deepak regularly appears before the U.S. Supreme Court. Most recently, in March 2021, he won a unanimous decision holding that people injured by mass-market products can get access to justice where the injury occurs (Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District). In 2019, Deepak argued at the invitation of the Court in support of a judgment left undefended by the Solicitor General (Smith v. Berryhill). He is the first Asian-American to receive an appointment to argue, and one of only two advocates selected in decades who did not previously clerk for a Justice. In the term ending in 2017, Deepak’s small firm was counsel for parties in three argued merits cases; he was lead counsel in two, prevailing in both. In Hernández v. Mesa, Deepak represented the family of a Mexican teenager who was killed in a cross-border shooting by a U.S. Border Patrol agent, successfully obtaining unanimous reversal of the Fifth Circuit’s 15-0 en banc ruling that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity. In 2010, Deepak argued AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, a watershed case on corporations’ use of forced arbitration to prevent consumers and workers from banding together to seek justice. 

There are few public-interest litigators in the nation whose work routinely spans as broad a range of legal issues: administrative law, constitutional law, civil rights, consumer protection, workers’ rights, class actions, environmental protection, gun violence, the criminalization of poverty, and public health. Deepak’s cross-cutting work has included championing disparate-impact liability under the Fair Housing Act (Texas Dep’t of Housing v. Inclusive Communities); defending Philadelphia’s policy barring discrimination against same-sex couples as foster parents (Fulton v. Philadelphia); helping the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey launch a $19 minimum wage for tens of thousands of airport workers; representing community groups in Los Angeles in a groundbreaking case combatting environmental racism; and representing the Association of Administrative Law Judges in a separation-of-powers challenge to a federal labor panel stacked with opponents of public-sector unions.

Deepak has handled cases in every federal circuit, several state supreme courts, and state and federal trial courts nationwide. He has also been a leading voice in the public debate over forced arbitration and the need for effective protections for consumers and workers, testifying on those issues multiple times before the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

Over the past four years, Deepak led high-profile challenges that sought to uphold the rule of law in the face of unprecedented abuses by Donald Trump and his administration. In Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics v. Trump, he persuaded the Second Circuit that competitors of Trump’s hotels had standing to sue him for accepting payments from foreign and domestic governments in violation of the Emoluments Clauses. In United States v. Flynn, Deepak represented the House Judiciary Committee majority, challenging Attorney General Barr’s interference in the prosecution of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Among other things, Deepak successfully defeated a midnight EPA rule that sought to cripple the Biden Administration’s ability to rely on science when setting environmental standards; established that Trump’s Acting Director of the Bureau of Land Management had been serving unlawfully for 424 days; obtained a ruling striking down an IRS decision to stop collecting donor information from dark-money campaign-finance groups; persuaded the D.C. Circuit to issue an emergency order halting the U.S. Agency for Global Media’s attempted takeover of a global internet freedom nonprofit; and contested Trump’s appointment of Mick Mulvaney to simultaneously serve as a White House official and director of the independent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Deepak is also known for devising new and creative legal strategies, including in ground-up litigation. He developed a nationwide class action, National Veterans Legal Services Program v. United States, in which he persuaded the Federal Circuit that the federal judiciary has been charging people unlawful fees for online access to court records. In another one-of-a-kind class action, he represented all of the nation’s bankruptcy judges, recovering $56 million in back pay for Congress’s violation of the Judicial Compensation Clause. The American Lawyer observed: “it’s hard to imagine a higher compliment than being hired to represent federal judges.” Deepak has also brought similarly innovative approaches to his work on gun safety. He has successfully rebutted Second Amendment challenges nationwide by championing an originalist case for common-sense gun safety laws, based on seven centuries of Anglo-American history stretching back to the Statute of Northampton of 1328. And he is currently representing domestic-violence shelters across West Virginia, defending their constitutional right to exclude armed abusers from their premises.

Before founding the firm in 2012, Deepak was Senior Counsel for Litigation and Senior Counsel for Enforcement Strategy at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As the first appellate litigator hired under the leadership of Elizabeth Warren, he launched the Bureau’s amicus program, defended its regulations, and worked with the Solicitor General’s office on Supreme Court matters. For seven years previously, Deepak was an attorney at Public Citizen Litigation Group, where he founded and directed the Consumer Justice Project and was the Supreme Court Assistance Project Fellow. Among other things, his work at Public Citizen saved people’s homes from foreclosure and stopped debt collectors from hounding veterans. Before that, Deepak served for two years as a law clerk to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California and worked on voting rights at the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, prisoners’ rights at the ACLU’s National Prison Project, and religion cases at Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. He studied law at Georgetown, Sanskrit at Oxford, and philosophy at Fordham, and competed in the World Universities Debating Championships in Manila, Philippines and Athens, Greece.

An elected member of the American Law Institute, Deepak sits on the boards or advisory boards of several nonprofit organizations and academic institutes, including the National Consumer Law Center, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Biden Institute at the University of Delaware, the Civil Justice Research Initiative of the University of California, Berkeley, and the Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies. He is a judge of the American Constitution Society’s Annual Richard D. Cudahy Writing Competition on Regulatory and Administrative Law. His publications include Arbitration as Wealth Transfer, 5 Yale L. & Pol’y Rev. 499 (2017) (with Lina Khan); Leveling the Playing Field on Appeal: The Case for a Plaintiff-Side Appellate Bar, 54 Duq. L. Rev. 383 (2016); and The Consumer Protection Bureau and the Constitution, 65 Admin L. Rev. 945 (2013).

Deepak’s family immigrated to the United States from northern India in the 1970s. He is the first lawyer in his family but not the first to advocate for justice; he’s inspired by the example of his grandfather, a journalist who was jailed by the British authorities for advocating nonviolent opposition to colonialism.


“One of the emerging giants of the appellate and the Supreme Court bar,” a “heavy hitter” and a “principled” and “incredibly talented lawyer” – Law 360

“An all-star progressive Supreme Court litigator.” – Washington Post

“Deepak Gupta is one of the country’s top litigators, having successfully argued several major constitutional issues before the Supreme Court. . . . He has taken on several high-stakes cases, but what sets him apart is his creativity.” – FastCase

“An excellent lawyer” with a “vibrant appellate practice focused on public interest cases and plaintiff-side representations.” – Chambers and Partners

A “progressive legal rock star.” – New York Law Journal

“Gupta’s increasing presence in the Supreme Court is particularly notable because of the small size and boutique nature of the firm.” – Empirical SCOTUS

“The star of the legal left who’s taking on Trump, bigly.” – Above the Law

“Deepak Gupta . . .  at age 34 was already known as a skilled appellate lawyer.” – The New York Times

“Deepak is an extraordinary attorney, with great strategic vision and deep insights into effective advocacy. He is one of the most capable lawyers with whom I have worked, and a person with a strong moral compass and enormous integrity.” – Paul Bland, Executive Director, Public Justice

“Deepak possesses sharp legal acumen, an invaluable strategic sense, a clear, uncluttered and persuasive writing style, and an easy manner that makes him a pleasure to work with. He is one of the few lawyers I know who can distill the essence of a complicated issue into a couple of sentences, and propose the resolution of that issue in both an evocative and logically appealing argument.” – John Roddy, Partner, Bailey & Glasser, Boston, MA

“Deepak Gupta is truly one of the finer appellate lawyers in the country, with an abiding interest in consumer rights and justice. I have been lucky enough to have worked with him on several cases, and he may be the best lawyer I have ever worked with. He has my unhesitating endorsement.” – Paul Arons, Friday Harbor, WA

“Deepak is a brilliant, tireless advocate for consumers. In a matter he handled in the United States Supreme Court, he gave one of the best-prepared, most compelling arguments I’d ever heard. Put simply, Deepak is an outstanding lawyer.” – Jeffrey Fazio, Partner, Fazio Micheletti LLP, San Ramon, CA

“Deepak is an outstanding attorney and a quick study who possesses a strong working knowledge of Supreme Court practice. His analytical and brief writing skills are excellent! In addition to all of this, Deepak is a great guy with whom I really enjoyed working.” – M. Reid Estes, Member, Dickinson Wright, Nashville, TN

“Deepak and his team handled an appeal before the Supreme Court of the United States for our firm and our clients, from start to finish, including oral argument before the High Court. We worked closely together for over one year and I had the privilege of seeing first hand the exceptional and detail-oriented approach Deepak brought to this all-important task. His work product was and is of the highest caliber and was met or exceeded only by his professionalism and enthusiasm for the task.” – Alex Tomasevic, Nicholas & Butler, LLP, San Diego, CA

“Deepak is an exceedingly bright, thoughtful, and resourceful attorney. I had the pleasure of seeing him argue before the U.S. Supreme Court and with humility and grace, he dominated the courtroom and easily outperformed his prestigious adversary. Beyond the argument, Deepak has always impressed me with his ability to quickly grasp and articulate complex concepts and demonstrate excellent judgment in his dealings with co-counsel and adversaries. I have no doubt that he will accomplish much over his career. Deepak has the skills and strong moral compass to be a true leader and credit to our profession. He has my respect and highest recommendation.” – Steve Berk, Principal, Berk Law, Washington, DC

“Deepak Gupta has a well deserved reputation as one of the best and brightest consumer lawyers in the country. He has a gift for thinking of the policy ramifications, issues, and arguments. Like a master chess player he is able to think several steps ahead of most people to anticipate adversaries, judges, and other people. Mr. Gupta quickly gets to the heart of complex legal issues. He is able to communicate issues in a compelling persuasive manner that the average lay person can understand and appreciate. If I were assembling a team of top lawyers for an important case, he is one of the first people that I would pick to be on my team. He is a capable and dedicated advocate for consumer rights.” – Michael Halbfish, Woodbridge, New Jersey

“Deepak is an excellent attorney. I have relied on his counsel on several health policy issues. His advice was instrumental in helping us craft a strong national menu labeling bill, which was signed into law in March 2010.” – Margo Wootan, Ph.D., Director of Nutrition Policy, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, DC

“Deepak is an extraordinary appellate advocate. Through his excellent writing, he reduces complex legal theories to clear and easily comprehensible arguments. Deepak’s creativity and extensive knowledge of substantive constitutional law and appellate procedure make him an exemplary consumer and plaintiff’s advocate.” Nina Simon, former Director of Litigation, Center for Responsible Lending

“Deepak Gupta ranks among the brightest, most articulate and astute lawyers in the consumer law field today. His appellate briefwriting is insightful, focused, and highly persuasive. It has been a pleasure to get to work with him.”Bob Hobbs, National Consumer Law Center, Boston, MA

“Deepak is one of the most insightful and dedicated lawyers I have ever encountered. His passion for his work manifests in every aspect of the cases he litigates. On several occasions, I have read and discussed at length multiple drafts of a single sentence in a brief. One can see the result of such single-minded focus in Deepak’s performance in the Supreme Court, in which an entire team of lawyers was unable to match Deepak’s preparation for and mastery of the case.” – Michael Page, Williams & Connolly, Washington, DC

“Deepak is one of the nation’s most well-respected consumer advocates. I’ve known Deepak for more than 15 years and, more recently, have worked with him on several projects. I watched as Deepak litigated Concepcion before the Court. I couldn’t image a better choice to represent the interests of consumers in that landmark case. Deepak is a fantastic attorney with a unique combination of talent and experience.” – Peter Stris, Principal, Stris & Maher, Los Angeles, CA

“Gupta has a calm, comfortable manner that conveys confidence [in oral argument.] . . . No one who knows Gupta seems to doubt that he can make the case against preemption.” – The National Law Journal


Cases Briefed and Argued

U.S. Supreme Court Cases

Ford Motor Company v. Montana Eighth Judicial District, No. 19-368 (When Ford targets a state for sale of allegedly defective cars and one of those cars injures a consumer in the state, do the courts of that state have personal jurisdiction over Ford? Or does the fact that the car was designed, manufactured, and originally sold elsewhere defeat jurisdiction?) (counsel for respondents Bandemer and Gullett)

Goldman Sachs v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, No. 20-222 (At the class-certification stage of a securities fraud lawsuit, how does a court properly account for the “generality” of the alleged misstatements?) (counsel for amici professors of securities law and complex litigation) 

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, No. 19-123 (Does a religious organization operating as a government contractor have a constitutional right to use taxpayer funds to discriminate against prospective foster parents on the basis of their sexual orientation?) (counsel for respondent City of Philadelphia)

Continental Resources v. Buckles, 20-374 (May a nonresident corporation’s allegedly tortious conduct in Montana, resulting in the death of an oilfield worker in North Dakota, provide a sufficient forum-related connection for courts to assert specific personal jurisdiction over that corporation in Montana?) (counsel for respondent)

Ally Financial v. Haskins, 20-177 (Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over claims of members of a nationwide class against an out-of-state finance company?) (counsel for respondent)

DISH Network v. Krakauer, 925 F.3d 643 (2019) (Did a class of people on the receiving end of tens of thousands of calls made to numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry suffer Article III injury?) (counsel for respondents)

Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 140 S. Ct. 2183 (2020) (Does the vesting of substantial executive authority in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an independent agency led by a single director, violate the separation of powers?) (counsel for amicus scholars of financial regulation)

Department of Homeland Security, et al., Petitioners v. Regents of the University of California, 140 S. Ct. 1891 (2020) (Was the Trump Administration’s decision to rescind DACA lawful?) (counsel for amicus labor unions)

Smith v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1765 (2019) (In social security cases, when the Appeals Council rejects a disability claim on the ground that the claimant’s administrative appeal was untimely, is that rejection a “final decision” subject to judicial review?) (argued in support of the judgment below at the invitation of the Court)

Apple v. Pepper, 139 S. Ct. 1514 (2019) (Do consumers of iPhone apps have an antitrust cause of action against Apple under the direct-purchaser rule?) (counsel for Open Markets Institute)

Gould v. Lipson, 141 S. Ct. 108 (2020) (Are Brookline’s and Boston’s public-carry firearms licensing regimes, which allow restricted licenses for many discrete purposes and unrestricted licenses for those with good reason to fear injury to themselves or their property, consistent with the Second Amendment?) (counsel for Town of Brookline and City of Boston)

Perryman v. Romero, 139 S. Ct. 2744 (2019) (Whether, or in what circumstances, cy pres relief comports with Rule 23(e)’s requirement that a settlement binding class members must be “fair, reasonable, and adequate.”) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

Rentmeester v. Nike, 139 S. Ct. 1375 (2019) (Is copyright protection for a photograph limited solely to the photographer’s selection and arrangement of unprotected elements or does it also cover elements of the photograph that express original, creative judgments by the photographer?) (counsel for petitioner)

Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, 138 S. Ct. 1942 (2019) (Are partisan-gerrymanderying claims justiciable and administrable?) (brief of mathematicians and law professors)

Lamps Plus v. Varela, 139 S. Ct. 1407 (2019) (Did the Federal Arbitration Act give the district court below authority to dismiss the case after referring it to arbitration?) (counsel for American Association for Justice)

Henry Schein v. Archer & White Sales, 139 S. Ct. 524 (2019) (When parties enter into a contract that delegates questions of arbitrability to an arbitrator, does the Federal Arbitration Act permit courts to require arbitration in any unrelated future dispute without first making an inquiry into the intended scope of the delegation?) (counsel for American Association for Justice)

J.B. Hunt v. Ortega, 138 S. Ct. 2601 (2018) (Does a federal deregulation statute preempt state break and wage laws as applied to a class of truck drivers?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

General Motors v. Bavlsik, 138 S. Ct. 1991 (2018) (Does the Seventh Amendment permit a damages-only retrial where there is a “a strong case” that the jury issued a compromise verdict?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

China Agritech v. Resh, 138 S. Ct. 1800 (2018) (Does American Pipe tolling permit a previously absent class member to bring a subsequent class action outside the applicable limitations period?) (counsel for American Association for Justice)

Epic Systems v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018) (Does an employer’s practice of requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements waiving class or collective actions constitute an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act?) (counsel for American Association for Justice)

Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, 137 S.Ct. 1144 (2017) (Does a state law that prohibits credit-card surcharges but allows cash discounts regulate speech protected by the First Amendment?) (successfully briefed and argued for petitioner on the merits)

Hernández v. Mesa, 137 S.Ct. 2003 (2017) (In the case of the cross-border shooting of an unarmed Mexican teenager by a U.S. Border Patrol agent, does the Fourth Amendment apply extraterritorially and does the officer enjoy qualified immunity?) (successful counsel of record for the petitioner on the merits)

Coventry Health Care v. Nevils, 137 S.Ct. 1190 (2017) (Does the Federal Employee Health Benefits Act’s express-preemption provision preempt state laws that prevent carriers from seeking subrogation or reimbursement and, if so, is preemption by contract consistent with the Supremacy Clause?) (co-counsel on the merits)

Bank of America v. Miami, 137 S.Ct. 1296 (2017) (May cities sue banks for discrimination under the Fair Housing Act?) (counsel to the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors)

Chevron Corporation v. Steven Donziger, 137 S.Ct. 2268 (2017) (Do federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain preemptive collateral attacks on money judgments issued by foreign courts–in this case, a $8 Billion Ecuadorian oil-pollution judgment?) (counsel for petitioner)

Armstrong v. National Football League (NFL Concussion Litigation), 137 S.Ct. 607 (2016) (Is the global settlement between retired professional football players and the NFL consistent with Rule 23 and due process?) (counsel for petitioners)

Triple Canopy v. United States ex rel Omar Badr, 136 S.Ct. 2504 (2016) (Is a defense contractor liable under the False Claims Act, on a “false certification” theory, for defrauding the U.S. military out of $10 million dollars worth of security services at an airbase in Iraq?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

Zwicker & Associates v. Wise, 136 S.Ct. 793 (2016) (Do the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and the Petition Clause of the First Amendment preclude liability under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act for attorney conduct in collection litigation?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

U.S. Legal Services Group v. Atalese, 135 S.Ct. 2804 (2015) (Does the Federal Arbitration Act prevent the New Jersey Supreme Court from declining to enforce an arbitration agreement on the grounds that it fails to inform consumers that they are giving up their right to go to court?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

Penske v. Dilts, 135 S.Ct. 2049 (2015) (Does the federal law that deregulated the trucking industry preempt longstanding state law requiring employers to provide meal and rest breaks to employees?) (counsel for successful respondents at petition stage)

Spokeo v. Robins, 136 S.Ct. 1540 (2016) (Does a consumer have sufficiently “concrete” injury to support Article III standing in a suit under the Fair Credit Reporting Act?) (counsel for respondent at petition stage)

Texas Department of Housing v. Texas Inclusive Communities Project, 135 S.Ct. 2507 (2015) (Are disparate-impact claims cognizable under the Fair Housing Act?) (counsel for current and former Members of Congress, presenting historical analysis ultimately adopted in the Court’s opinion)

Keiran v. Home Capital, 135 S.Ct. 1152 (2015) (Is written notice within three years of consummation of the loan sufficient to exercise the right to rescind under the Truth in Lending Act or does the consumer also need to sue for rescission within that three-year period?) (counsel for petitioners)

Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital Ltd., 134 S.Ct. 2819 (2014) (interpretation of sovereign bonds in litigation arising out of Argentina’s fiscal crisis) (counsel for amicus Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate in economics and former President of the World Bank)

Mount Holly v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens, 134 S. Ct. 636 (2013) (Are disparate-impact claims cognizable under the Fair Housing Act?) (counsel for current and former Members of Congress)

Geneva-Roth Ventures v. Kelker, 134 S. Ct. 734 (2013) (Did the Montana Supreme Court run afoul of the Federal Arbitration Act in refusing to enforce an arbitration clause in an online payday loan contract?) (obtained favorable settlement after filing brief in opposition but before Court’s consideration of the petition)

Charvat v. First National Bank, 134 S. Ct. 1515 (2014) (To what extent does Congress have the power to create injuries cognizable under Article III?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

Catsimatides v. Irizarry, 134 S. Ct. 1516 (2014) (To what extent does the Fair Labor Standards Act authorize personal liability for owners or officers of corporate employers?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

Zinni v. Convergent Outsourcing, 133 S. Ct. 2337 (2013) (Does a defendant’s informal, unaccepted offer to settle a plaintiff’s Fair Debt Collections Practices Act claims deprive a federal district court of jurisdiction to decide those claims, where the defendant has neither tendered the offered settlement amount nor agreed to entry of an enforceable judgment?) (successful brief in opposition)

McBurney v. Young, 133 S. Ct. 1709 (2013) (Does a state law restricting public-records access to citizens of that state violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause or dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution?) (briefed and argued on the merits)

American Express v. Italian Colors (In re American Express Merchants Litigation), 133 S. Ct. 2304 (2013) (May an arbitration clause preventing class-action litigation be held unenforceable where it would effectively preclude any action seeking to vindicate the plaintiffs’ federal statutory rights?) (co-counsel at certiorari and merits stage)

First American Financial v. Edwards, 132 S. Ct. 2536 (2012) (Do consumers have Article III standing to seek statutory damages for a violation of an anti-kickback statute where they allege kickbacks but no effect on the price or quality of services?) (dismissed as improvidently granted) (co-counsel for United States)

Freeman v. Quicken Loans, 132 S. Ct. 2034 (2012) (Does the Real Estate Settlement Services Act prohibit a defendant from charging fees for services it did not perform, or does the Act prohibit only arrangements in which the defendant shares fees with another company?) (co-counsel for United States)

Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, 132 S. Ct. 740 (2012) (Do state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction over private actions under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act?) (counsel at petition stage; successful petition for certiorari)

Compton Unified School District v. Starvenia Addison, 132 S. Ct. 996 (2012) (Are claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act limited to intentional conduct?) (successful brief in opposition)

AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) (Are state-law decisions striking down class-action bans as unconscionable preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act?) (briefed and argued on the merits)

Chase Bank USA v. McCoy, 131 S. Ct. 871 (2011) (Do Truth-in-Lending regulations require notice of a credit-card rate increase, where the cardholder agreement authorizes a maximum default rate?) (co-counsel at the merits stage; lead counsel at petition stage)

Mills v. Midwest Title Loans, 131 S. Ct. 83 (2010) (Is an Indiana law regulating car title loans unconstitutional extraterritorial regulation under the dormant Commerce Clause?) (counsel for cert-stage amici)

U.S. Bank National Association v. Thomas, 130 S. Ct. 3504 (2010) (Are state-law usury claims against federally insured state-chartered banks completely preempted by the Federal Deposit Insurance Act?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

Rent-a-Center v. Jackson, 130 S. Ct. 2772 (2010) (May an arbitration agreement delegate the question of the arbitration agreement’s validity to the arbitrator?) (co-counsel at merits stage)

Stolt-Nielsen v. Animalfeeds International, 130 S. Ct. 1758 (2010) (Where the parties have asked the arbitrators to decide whether class arbitration is permissible and the arbitrators have answered in the affirmative, have the arbitrators exceeded their powers?) (amicus at merits-stage)

Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich, LPA, 129 S. Ct. 2863 (2009) (Is ignorance of the law a complete defense to civil liability for abusive collection practices?) (counsel for amici national consumer groups at merits stage)

Cassens Transport Co. v. Brown, 130 S. Ct. 795 (2009) (May workers sue their employers for workers’ compensation fraud, or are such suits reverse-preempted by the McCarran-Ferguson Act?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

Mohawk v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) (Are denials of attorney-client privilege claims immediately appealable through the federal courts?) (author of successful merits briefing)

The Coffee Beanery v. WW, Welshans, and Williams, 130 S. Ct. 81 (2009) (May arbitration awards be vacated based on manifest disregard of the law?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

Friends of Pinto Creek v. Carlota Copper Company, 129 S. Ct. 896 (2009) (Did the EPA’s issuance of a permit for an open-pit copper mine on one of the nation’s most endangered rivers violate Clean Water Act regulations?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. Laster, 128 S. Ct. 2500 (2008) (Are decisions striking down class-action bans as unconscionable under state law preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act?) (counsel for respondents; successful brief in opposition)

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Tuazon, 549 U.S. 1076 (2006) (Does general jurisdiction based on sales-related contacts alone violate the Due Process Clause?) (successful brief in opposition)

John Hancock Insurance Company v. Patten, 549 U.S. 975 (2006) (Should the manifest-disregard-of-law standard for judicial review of arbitration awards be narrowed?) (successful brief in opposition)

Garry Ioffe v. Skokie Motor Sales, Inc., 546 U.S. 121 (2006) (Does the Motor Vehicle Safety and Information Act, also known as the Odometer Act, extend to title fraud unrelated to mileage?) (unsuccessful petition for certiorari)

Dolan v. United States, 546 U.S. 481 (2006) (To what extent does the United States Postal Service have sovereign immunity from personal-injury suits under the Federal Tort Claims Act?) (co-counsel, successful merits briefing)

Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006) (Does due process require the state to take additional steps to notify a property owner upon return of a certified-mail notice of a tax sale or property forfeiture?) (co-counsel, successful petition for certiorari and merits briefing)

Will v. Hallock, 546 U.S. 345 (2006) (Does the collateral-order doctrine allow an interlocutory appeal from a decision denying the federal government’s invocation of the Federal Tort Claims Act judgment bar?) (co-counsel, successful merits briefing)

General Motors v. Delmas Ford, 546 U.S. 935 (2005) (Does the application of one state’s law in a nationwide products-liability class action violate the Commerce Clause or Due Process Clause?) (successful brief in opposition)

Arpaio v. Demery, 545 U.S. 1139 (2005) (Do 24-hour Internet video broadcasts of the activities of pretrial jail detainees violate their right to substantive due process?) (successful brief in opposition)

Bayer AG v. Paul, 544 U.S. 919 (2005) (Do federal appellate courts have jurisdiction to review remand orders where the reasons for remand are different from those identified in the motion to remand?) (successful brief in opposition)

SSA Gulf, Inc. v. Magee, 544 U.S. 904 (2005) (Does the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act completely preempt state law?) (successful brief in opposition)

Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association, 544 U.S. 550 (2005) (Can an advertising program that all beef producers are compelled by the government to support be saved from invalidation as compelled speech on the theory that it is government speech or commercial speech?) (amicus, merits stage)

Lockhart v. United States, 546 U.S. 142 (2005) (May the federal government withhold a person’s Social Security disability benefits to collect on old student loan debt?) (drafted successful petition for certiorari; case was unsuccessful on the merits)

Correctional Services Corporation v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61 (2001) (May a prisoner sue a private prison corporation under Bivens for violating his or her constitutional rights under the Eighth Amendment?) (drafted ACLU’s amicus brief)

State and Federal Appeals

Open Technology Fund v. Pack (D.C. Cir.) (successful challenge to U.S. Agency for Global Media CEO Michael Pack’s attempted wholesale removal and replacement of the officers and directors of Open Technology Fund, a nonprofit dedicated to global internet freedom)

Dannels v. BNSF Railway Co. (Montana S. Ct.) (successful defense, on behalf of an injured railroad worker, of a judgment that the Federal Employers’ Liability Act does not preempt bad-faith claims against a railroad under state law)

XY Planning v. Securities and Exchange Commission (2d Cir.) (challenge to the SEC’s “best interest” rule, which violates the Dodd-Frank Act and the Investment Advisors Act by failing to close the loophole for broker-dealers from fiduciary standards applicable to investment advisors) 

Wal-Mart v. Magadia (9th Cir.) (pending defense of a $102 million class-action judgment arising out of Wal-Mart’s widespread violations of the California Labor Code) 

Cameron v. Bouchard (6th Cir.) (with co-counsel at Civil Rights Corps, ACLU of Michigan, and the Advancement Project, defended an injunction ordering a jail to implement safeguards to protect prisoners from the spread of coronavirus and to submit lists of medically-vulernable inmates for release)

National Veterans Legal Services Program v. United States (Fed. Cir.) (successful defense on appeal of a summary-judgment ruling in a nationwide class action challenging fee schedule for access to federal court records via PACER) (briefed and argued)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump, No. 18-474 (2d Cir.) (successful appeal over standing of hotel and restaurant competitors of the President’s businesses to challenge his ongoing violations of the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses) (briefed and argued)

Farrell v. Bank of America (9th Cir.) (defense of a nationwide class-action settlement under which Bank of America agrees to pay $70 million in immediate relief and stop charging usurious interest to customers with negative account balances, amounting to $1.2 billion in future savings)

Alig v. Quicken Loans (4th Cir.) (defense of $11 million judgment against subprime mortgage lender Quicken Loans for unlawfully skewing the home appraisal process)

Krakauer v. DISH Network (4th Cir.) (successful defense on appeal of a $60 million class-action jury verdict against Dish Network for widespread violations of the federal telemarketing laws–the largest such verdict in history) 

Zusi v. Sisolak (Nevada S. Ct.) (enforceability of a state law, adopted by Nevada’s voters via ballot initiative, to close the legal loophole that lets people buy guns without background checks)

Cole v. CRST Inc. (9th Cir.) (pending appeal in class action over employer’s affirmative obligation to provide meal and rest breaks to workers under California law)

Gould v. Morgan (1st Cir.) (won appeal, on behalf of Town of Brookline, Massachusetts, defending the town’s public-carry restrictions against a Second Amendment challenge)

Jang v. Asset Campus Housing, Inc., 739 F. App’x 465 (9th Cir. 2018) (won appeal involving First Amendment challenge to California credit-card surcharge statute) (briefed and argued)

Long v. Southeast Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 903 F.3d 312 (3d Cir. 2018) (won appeal over standing of job applicants to challenge employer’s failure to provide criminal background reports) (briefed and argued)

English v. Trump, No. 18-5007 (D.C. Circuit) (leadership dispute over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, focusing on interpretation of the Dodd-Frank Act and Federal Vacancies Reform Act) (briefed and argued; appeal dismissed before decision)

Italian Colors v. Harris, 878 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir. 2018) (prevailed in First Amendment challenge to California’s credit-card surcharge law) (briefed and argued)

Chamber of Commerce v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 885 F.3d 360 (5th Cir. 2018) (counsel for amici in defense of Labor Department’s Fiduciary Rule)

PHH Corporation v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 881 F.3d 75 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (counsel for amici in defense of constitutionality of CFPB)

Arkansas Teachers Retirement System v. Goldman Sachs, 879 F.3d 474 (2nd Cir. 2018) (counsel for Louisiana Sheriffs’ Pension and Relief Fund in appeal concerning rebuttal of fraud-on-the-market presumption in securities litigation)

Breazeale v. Victim Services, Inc., 878 F.3d 759 (9th Cir. 2017) (won ruling of first impression nationwide, holding that a private corporation may not use threats of criminal prosecution on prosecutor letterhead to induce citizens into binding arbitration) (briefed and argued)

Arellano v. Clark County Collection Service, 875 F.3d 1213 (9th Cir. 2017) (won appeal holding that a novel debt-collection tactic–buying consumers’ collection-abuse claims at auction–is preempted by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) (briefed and argued)

Bavlsik v. General Motors, 870 F.3d 800 (8th Cir. 2017) (obtained reversal of district court’s decision to set aside jury verdict, remanding for a new damages-only trial in products liability case in which the plaintiff was rendered quadriplegic as a result of GM’s negligence)

Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (opposed Second Amendment challenge to District of Columbia’s restrictions on the public carrying of firearms) (counsel to Everytown for Gun Safety, the nation’s largest gun-violence-prevention organization)

Roberts v. Capital One, 719 Fed. Appx. 33 (2nd Cir. 2017) (successful reversal of decision dismissing a class action challenging bank overdraft practices)

Setara Tyson v. Sterling Rental, 836 F.3d 571 (6th Cir. 2016) (successful appeal of consumer’s suit against an unscrupulous car dealer’s “yo yo” scam, permitting claims under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and reversing dismissal of statutory conversion claim under the common-law economic loss doctrine) (briefed and argued)

Peruta v. County of San Diego, 824 F.3d 919 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (successfully opposed Second Amendment challenge to California’s restrictions on the public carry of firearms and presented, for the first time, a historical case for seven centuries of Anglo-American regulation of public carry) (counsel to Everytown for Gun Safety)

In re NFL Concussion Litigation, 821 F.3d 410 (3d Cir. 2016) (appellate counsel to former professional football players in appeal over global class-action settlement of claims that the NFL deliberately hid the effects of brain injuries from concussions) (briefed and argued)

West Virginia v. EPA (D.C. Cir.) (as counsel to Citizens Utility Board, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen, filed a brief focusing on the consumer benefits of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan to combat climate change)

United States Telecom Ass’n v. FCC, 825 F.3d 674 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (represented intervenors defending the FCC’s net neutrality rules) (counsel to Credo Mobile, Inc., Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, and, as part of a coalition of intervenor tech companies and non-profit advocacy groups)

Chevron v. Donziger, 833 F.3d 74 (2nd Cir. 2016) (appellate counsel for defendant in Chevron Corporation’s RICO action against Amazon communities and their advocates in an effort to collaterally attack an $8.6 Billion Ecuadorian judgment holding Chevron accountable for decades of pollution of an area of the rainforest the size of Rhode Island) (briefed and argued)

Silvester v. Harris, 843 F.3d 816 (9th Cir. 2016) (successful defeat of a Second Amendment challenge to California’s law imposing a ten-day waiting period on firearms purchases) (counsel to Everytown for Gun Safety)

Rowell v. Pettijohn, 816 F.3d 73 (5th Cir. 2016) (appeal challenging Texas’s credit-card surcharge law on First Amendment and vagueness grounds) (briefed and argued)

Hayes v. Delbert Services Corp., 811 F.3d 666 (4th Cir. 2016) (defeated internet payday lender’s “tribal arbitration” scheme as an unlawful prospective waiver of federal law) (pending)

Ambridge v. Alaska Trustee, 372 P.3d 207 (Alaska Supreme Court 2016) (won a decision holding that foreclosure activity is covered by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the state’s consumer-protection law)

Dana’s Railroad v. Bondi, 807 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2015) (successful First Amendment challenge to Florida’s credit-card surcharge law on First Amendment and vagueness grounds) (briefed and argued)

Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, 808 F.3d 118 (2nd Cir. 2015) (defended a victory in a constitutional challenge to New York’s credit-card surcharge law, which Judge Rakoff struck down on First Amendment and vagueness grounds; lost on appeal and successfully petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court) (briefed and argued)

Evankavitch v. Green Tree Servicing, 793 F.3d 355 (3d Cir. 2015) (successfully defended a jury verdict in an appeal raising a question of first impression under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: who bears the burden of proof as to whether a collector’s phone calls fell within a safe harbor for contacts seeking location information?) (briefed and argued)

Chen v. Major League Baseball, 798 F.3d 72 (2nd Cir. 2015) (retained to argue appeal over whether Major League Baseball is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act) (briefed and argued)

Moran v. The Screening Pros (9th Cir.) (retained to appeal a decision striking down California’s Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act, one of the nation’s strongest protections against abuses by background-screening companies, on due process vagueness grounds) (briefed and argued)

Kingery v. Quicken Loans, 629 Fed. Appx. 509 (4th Cir. 2015) (retained to brief and argue appeal concerning a question of first impression under the Fair Credit Reporting Act: what does it mean for a mortgage lender to “use” a credit score so as to trigger disclosure requirements?)

Cabral v. Supple, 608 Fed. Appx. 482 (9th Cir. 2015) (retained to defend a district court’s decision certifying a class of purchasers of Supple, a fruit juice that claims to cure arthritis) (briefed and argued)

Murphy v. DCI Biologicals, 797 F.3d 1302 (11th Cir. 2015) (retained to seek reversal of decision reading the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s “prior express consent” requirement to permit implied consent to autodialed messages) (briefed and argued)

Russell v. Absolute Collection Service, Inc., 763 F.3d 385 (4th Cir. 2014) (successfully obtained decision affirming jury verdict in collection-abuse case and rejecting argument that consumers must first make a dispute before invoking the protections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) (briefed and argued)

Mais v. Gulf Coast Collection Bureau, 768 F.3d 1110 (11th Cir. 2014) (defended a decision holding that routine hospital admission forms do not supply the consent necessary to satisfy the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s “prior express consent” requirement under Federal Communications Commission rulings)

Brady v. Deloitte & Touche LLP, 587 Fed.Appx. 363 (9th Cir. 2014) (retained to handle an interlocutory appeal of a decision decertifying a class of salaried non-licensed accounting firm employees alleging overtime violations) (briefed and argued)

Dreher v. Experian (4th Cir. 2014) (successfully defeated Experian’s petition for interlocutory review, primarily on Article III standing grounds, of a decision granting class certification in a Fair Credit Reporting Act action)

Dilts v. Penske, 769 F.3d 637 (9th Cir. 2014) (successfully obtained reversal of a string of decisions holding that a provision of the California labor code requiring meal and rest breaks is preempted, as applied to a class of truck drivers, by the Federal Aviation Authorization Act of 1994–a transportation deregulation measure that expressly preempts state law relating to “prices, routes, or services”) (briefed and argued)

Clark v. Absolute Collection Service, Inc., 741 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2014) (prevailed on appeal in a class action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act on an issue that has divided the circuits: whether consumers may orally dispute the validity of a debt or whether the statute imposes a writing requirement) (briefed and argued)

Catsimatides v. Irizarry, 722 F.3d 99 (2nd Cir. 2013) (successfully obtained published Second Circuit decision holding that New York billionaire John Castimatides is personally liable–as an “employer” under the Fair Labor Standards Act–for millions of dollars in wage-and-hour violations to a class of workers at a chair of grocery stores that he owns; Castimatides was represented on appeal by former Solicitor General Walter Dellinger) (briefed and argued)

Charvat v. Mutual First Federal Credit Union, 725 F.3d 819 (8th Cir. 2013) (successfully obtained published Eighth Circuit decision reversing district court’s dismissal of two consumer class actions on the grounds that the consumers lack injury-in-fact for purposes of Article III standing to pursue a claim for statutory damages arising out of federal notice requirements) (briefed and argued)

Cabala v. Crowley, 736 F.3d 226 (2nd Cir. 2013) (successfully obtained published Second Circuit decision holding that a defendants’ offer of full relief including attorneys’ fees–but lacking a formal offer of judgment–does not moot or otherwise preclude the prevailing plaintiffs’ entitlement to further fees)

Bayer v. Carrera, 727 F.3d 300 (3d Cir. 2013) (retained to prepare petition for rehearing en banc seeking review of Third Circuit decision on “ascertainability” in consumer products class actions and organize amicus strategy; resulted in an unusual four-judge dissent from denial recommending action by the Federal Rules Committee)

Manno v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery (11th Cir.) (successfully opposed a petition for interlocutory review of a class certification decision)

Crouser v. BAC Home Loans Servicing LP (11th Cir.) (represented the debtor in an appeal raising an unsettled question of bankruptcy law: whether settlement proceeds from a violation of the automatic stay are the property of the debtors’ Chapter 13 bankruptcy estate)

Soutter v. Equifax, 498 Fed.Appx. 260 (4th Cir. 2012) (retained, after the completion of briefing, to argue opposite former Solicitor General Paul Clement in this post-Wal-Mart appeal arising out of a Fair Credit Reporting Act class action; defended a district court decision certifying a statewide class of consumers whose credit reports indicated that they had outstanding judgments when in fact those judgments had been vacated, satisfied, or dismissed) (briefed and argued)

Grayson v. AT&T, 15 A.3d 219 (D.C. 2011) (en banc decision concerning whether consumers must suffer injury-in-fact to sue under D.C.’s Consumer Protection Act)

Lee v. Carter-Reed, 203 N.J. 496 (2010) (in a case concerning deceptive-trade-practices claims against a dietary supplement manufacturer, the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s denial of class certification and adopted our brief’s analytical framework based on the economic concept of “credence goods”) (counsel for amici curiae consumer groups)

Salinger v. Colting, 607 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2010) (arguing that copyright does not protect the character Holden Caulfield independently of the work in which the character is fixed) (counsel for amicus curiae)

Pepper v. Routh Crabtree, 219 P.3d 1017 (Alaska 2009) (in case of first impression nationwide, won reversal of lower court’s dismissal on grounds that the First Amendment’s Petition Clause and the Noerr-Pennington doctrine immunize unfair and deceptive trade practices carried out in the context of litigation) (briefed and argued)

West v. Carfax, 2009-Ohio-6857 (Ohio App. 2009) (won reversal on appeal of a nationwide class-action settlement) (briefed and argued)

Harris v. Mexican Specialty Foods, 564 F.3d 1301 (11th Cir. 2009) (won reversal of lower-court decision striking down Fair Credit Reporting Act’s statutory-damages provision as unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause) (briefed and argued)

Danow v. Borack, 2009 WL 2883469 (11th Cir. 2009) (successfully defended jury verdict in collection harassment case) (lead appellate counsel)

Picard v. Credit Solutions, Inc., 564 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2009) (whether the Credit Repair Organizations Act’s anti-waiver provision precludes mandatory binding arbitration) (amicus)

New York State Restaurant Ass’n v. New York City Bd. of Health, 556 F.3d 114 (2nd Cir. 2009) (holding New York City’s regulation requiring posting of calorie counts on fast food menus is not preempted by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act and does not violate the First Amendment’s prohibition on compelled speech) (lead counsel for amici Congressman Henry Waxman, former FDA Commissioner David Kessler, American Medical Association, American Public Health Association, American Diabetes Association, Center for Science in the Public Interest, and professors of medicine, nutrition, and public health)

Del Campo v. Kennedy, 517 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2008) (won precedent establishing that private government contractors may not be shielded by state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment) (briefed and argued)

Sidun v. Wayne County Treasurer, 481 Mich. 503, 751 N.W.2d 453 (Mich. 2008) (won constitutional due-process challenge to foreclosure of client’s home) (briefed and argued)

Reichert v. National Credit Systems, Inc., 531 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2008) (defeated a debt collector’s novel reliance-on-the-creditor defense to liability under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) (briefed and argued)

Palmer v. Friendly Ice Cream Corp., 285 Conn. 462, 940 A.2d 742 (Conn. 2008) (whether denials of class certification are appealable final orders under the “death knell” theory) (briefed and argued)

Griffin v. Bierman, 403 Md. 186, 941 A.2d 475 (Md. 2008) (unsuccessful constitutional due-process challenge to Maryland’s home mortgage foreclosure procedures; in response to the decision, procedures were subsequently reformed by the Maryland Legislature) (briefed and argued)

Jones v. Flowers, 373 Ark. 213 (Ark. 2008) (established, on remand from a U.S. Supreme Court victory in a constitutional challenge to state tax foreclosure procedures, that attorney’s fees may be recovered under federal civil rights law even when the plaintiff’s original complaint did not cite the federal statute) (briefed, co-counsel)

Rosario v. American Corrective Counseling Services, 506 F.3d 1039 (11th Cir. 2007) (won reversal of a lower-court decision dismissing a statewide class action; the court, distinguishing its own prior precedent, held that a private corporation under contract with Florida state prosecutors was not entitled to state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment) (briefed and argued)

Beuter v. Canyon State Professional Services, 261 Fed. Appx. 14 (9th Cir. 2007) (successful appeal establishing that debt collectors cannot avoid liability under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act based on reliance on their clients) (lead appellate counsel)

Danow v. Borack, 197 Fed.Appx. 853 (11th Cir. 2006) (obtained reversal of a district court’s improper sua sponte dismissal of a consumer’s complaint of telephone harassment by a debt collector) (lead appellate counsel)

Luessenhop v. Clinton County, 466 F.3d 259 (2nd Cir. 2006) (adopting amicus brief’s argument that the federal Tax Injunction Act does not preclude plaintiffs from bringing constitutional due-process challenges to state tax foreclosure procedures in federal court) (amicus)

Stackhouse v. McKnight, 168 Fed. Appx. 464 (2nd Cir. 2004) (reversing magistrate judge’s approval of a consumer class-action settlement on grounds that objectors had not waived their right to decision by an Article III judge) (briefed, co-counsel)

Trial-Level Litigation:

Environmental Defense Fund v. EPA (D. Mont.) (successful APA challenge to the Trump Administration’s “censored science” rule, a midnight rule aimed at limiting the science used by EPA to protect the public health and the environment)

Open Technology Fund v. Pack (D.D.C.) (challenge to the wholesale removal and replacement of the officers and directors of Open Technology Fund, Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia, and Middle East Broadcasting Networks by U.S. Agency for Global Media CEO Michael Pack, resulting in a successful request for an emergency injunction in the D.C. Circuit)

Association of Administrative Law Judges v. Federal Service Impasses Panel (D.D.C.) (Appointments Clause challenge to the composition of the independent panel empowered to resolve impasses between federal agencies and federal-sector labor unions)

Miyoko’s Kitchen, Inc. v. Ross (N.D. Cal. ) (First Amendment challenge, on behalf of Miyoko’s Kitchen, a 100% plant-based foods company targeted for censorship by the State of California’s Milk and Dairy Foods Safety Branch)

Awan v. The Daily Caller (D.C. Sup. Ct.) (libel suit on behalf of Pakistani-American former employees of the U.S. House of Representatives, against The Daily Caller and Regnery Publishing, for falsely accusing them of crimes including hacking and espionage — even after the FBI and the DOJ affirmatively debunked those claims)

West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence v. Morrisey, Attorney General (S.D. W. Va.) (suit on behalf of a statewide coalition of domestic-violence shelters challenging a West Virginia law that requires the shelters to allow guns onto their parking lots and forbids them even from asking questions about whether visitors have guns)

Doris Behr 2012 Irrevocable Trust v. Johnson & Johnson (D.N.J.) (representing California Public Employees’ Retirement System and Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association as intervenors to defend shareholders’ right to bring securities-fraud lawsuits, seeking dismissal of a declaratory-judgment suit aimed at encouraging companies to include forced arbitration clauses in their corporate bylaws)

Bullock v. IRS (D. Mont.) (successful challenge on behalf of the Governor of Montana and the State of New Jersey, under the Administrative Procedure Act, to an IRS action that would have shielded dark-money groups from having to disclose large-dollar donors)

SEIU v. Vos (Wisc.) (unions’ state constitutional challenge, on separation-of-powers grounds, to laws passed by lame-duck GOP-controlled Wisconsin Legislature to weaken the powers of the incoming Democratic governor and attorney general)

National Veterans Legal Services Program, et al. v. United States (D.D.C.) (lead counsel for the plaintiffs in a class action challenging the fee structure of PACER, the federal judiciary’s online public records system)

Montrois v. United States (D.D.C.) (serve as class counsel, with Motley Rice LLC, to a nationwide class of approximately 700,000 tax-return preparers challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s collection of millions of dollars in fees absent statutory authority)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, et al. v. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) (lead counsel for plaintiffs, including hotel and restaurant competitors, challenging Donald Trump’s violations of Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses)

District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump (D. Md.) (counsel for D.C. and Maryland in challenge to Donald Trump’s violations of Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses)

Houser v. United States, 114 Fed.Cl. 576 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (as lead counsel for a certified class of all federal bankruptcy judges in the United States, obtained a judgment entitling class members to approximately $56 million in back pay stemming from Congress’s violation of the Constitution’s Compensation Clause; received President’s Award from National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges)

Youth for Environmental Justice v. City of Los Angeles (Cal. Superior Ct.) (action challenging city’s rubber-stamping of applications to drill oil in urban neighborhoods and racially disparate imposition of conditions on drilling)

Heldt v. Payday Financial LLC & Western Sky Financial LLC (D.S.D.)(counsel to intervenors challenging nationwide class action settlement of usury claims against tribal online payday lender)

Expressions Hair Design, et al. v. Schneiderman, 975 F. Supp. 2d 430 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (as lead counsel for a group of merchants, prevailed in a constitutional challenge to New York’s credit-card surcharge law on First Amendment, void-for-vagueness, and antitrust-preemption grounds)

Italian Colors v. Harris, Attorney General of California (E.D. Cal.) (lead counsel to merchants challenging constitutionality of California’s credit-card surcharge law)

Rowell v. Abbott, Attorney General of Texas (W.D. Tex.) (lead counsel to merchants challenging constitutionality of Texas’s credit-card surcharge law)

Dana’s Railroad Supply v. Bondi (N.D. Fla.) (lead counsel to merchants challenging constitutionality of Florida’s credit-card surcharge law; case is currently on appeal)

Breazeale v. Victim Services, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) (class action against for-profit debt collection company that rents out the prosecutors’ letterhead to threaten consumers with criminal prosecution in an effort to collect civil debts)

Cavnar v. Bounceback (E.D. Wash.) (class action against for-profit debt collection company that rents out prosecutors’ letterhead to threaten consumers with criminal prosecution in an effort to collect civil debts)

First Premier Bank v. Evolution Finance (D.S.D.) (as lead counsel for a consumer-review website accused of trademark infringement by a bank specializing in subprime credit cards, mounted a First Amendment defense and successfully defeated bank’s preliminary-injunction motion)

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Wasden (D. Idaho 2015) (free speech and equal protection challenge to Idaho’s “Ag Gag” law, intended to suppress covert investigations of inhumane conditions at agricultural facilities) (counsel to constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky)

Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 907 F. Supp. 2d 112 (D.D.C. 2012) (lead counsel for CFPB in successful defense of regulations governing licensing of mortgage loan originators against a challenge under the Administrative Procedure Act and Fifth Amendment).

Koch Industries v. Does (Youth for Climate Truth), 2011 WL 1775765 (D. Utah 2011) (lead counsel in a successful First Amendment defense of climate-change activists responsible for a spoof website and press release concerning Koch Industries’ position on climate change, accused by the conglomerate of trademark infringement, cybersquatting, computer hacking, and breach of contract)

Public Citizen, et al v. Mukasey, 2008 WL 4532540 (N.D. Cal.) (lead counsel for three national consumer groups in a successful APA unreasonable-delay suit against the U.S. Department of Justice, resulting in creation and implementation of the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System)

Briggs v. Army & Air Force Exchange Service (N.D. Cal.) (obtained $7.4 Million settlement for a nationwide class of soldiers and veterans in a case challenging the government’s illegal withholding of veterans’ federal benefits to collect old debts arising out of purchases of military uniforms)

Rosario v American Corrective Counseling Services (M.D. Fla.), Hamilton v. American Corrective Counseling Services (N.D. Ind.), and Del Campo v. American Corrective Counseling Services (N.D. Cal.) (represented statewide classes of consumers in Florida, Indiana, and California challenging the abusive practices of a debt collector that operates collection programs under contract with local prosecutors, using false threats of prosecution and jail to coerce payment of collection fees)

New York State Restaurant Ass’n v. New York City, 509 F. Supp. 2d 351 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) and NYSRA v. NYC II, 2008 WL 1752455, stay denied, 545 F. Supp. 2d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (lead counsel for Congressman Henry Waxman, former FDA Commissioner David Kessler, the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Diabetes Association, other public health groups, and leading professors of medicine and public health, as amici curiae, in defense of New York City’s calorie labeling law against challenges based on federal preemption and First Amendment)

Dynetech v. Leonard, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (M.D. Fla. 2007) (successfully represented two consumer-review websites in this Internet free speech dispute, in which an infomercial company attempted to invoke trademark law to stifle critical commentary about its questionable investment software products)


Speaking Appearances

Panelist, “Access to the courts: Assessing modern standing doctrine and potential reforms,” Brookings Institution, March 16, 2020 (online)

Keynote panel, “Practicing in the Supreme Court in Changing and Turbulent Times” (with Kesli Brown Corkran), 2021 Appellate Practice Institute, co-sponsored by the Minnesota Continuing Legal Education and the Minnesota State Bar Association Appellate Practice Section, February 26, 2021 (online)

Guest speaker, Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic, February 9, 2021 (online)

Lecturer, Consumer Law Advocates, Students, and Scholars (CLASS) Network, moderated by Ted Mermin of the University of California, Berkeley, with co-panelist Christopher Peterson of the University of Utah, January 22, 2021 (online)

Guest speaker, Harvard Law School Supreme Court Ligation Clinic, January 13, 2021 (online)

Panelist, “Supreme Court Advocacy in the Age of COVID-19,” moderated by Bob Peck, with Tom Goldstein and Roman Martinez, ABA Section of Litigation, Appellate Practice Committee, December 16, 2020 (online)

Guest Lecturer, Consumer Law, University of Florida Law School, November 19, 2020 (online)

Panelist, “The Gordian Knot: When Predominance Challenges Predominate,” discussion with Scott Nelson, Paul Bland, and Seth Lesser, 2020 Class Action Symposium, National Consumer Law Center, November 19, 2020 (online)

Moderator, Closing Plenary Session with Robert Reich, National Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, National Consumer Law Center, November, 20, 2020 (online)

Panelist, “Assessing Antitrust Reform Proposals: How Could They Affect Private Enforcement?,” 14th Annual Private Antitrust Enforcement Conference, November 10, 2020 (online)

Panelist, “Special Session: The Future of the Second Amendment’s Right to Keep and Bear Arms: From the Supreme Court to Social Unrest in the Streets‎,” moderated by Judge Thomas Hardiman of the Third Circuit, with John Ohlendorf and Mark Smith, Federalist Society 2020 National Lawyers Convention (online)

Guest lecturer, Civil Procedure, American University, Washington College of Law (with Prof. Amanda Frost), October 14, 2020 (online)

“Circuit Splits and How to Handle Them,” ABA National Class Action Institute (with Judge Eric Miller, Judge Luis Restreppo, Cari Dawson, and Drew McGuinness), October 13, 2020 (online)

Guest lecturer, Federal Practice Seminar: Contemporary Issues, Georgetown Law (Irv Gornstein and Judge Nina Pillard), September 28, 2020 (online)

Guest lecturer, Civil Procedure (David Vladeck), Georgetown Law, September 3, 2020 (online)

“COVID 19’s Impact on Consumer Law,” University of California, Berkeley (with Lauren Willis), sponsored by the Civil Justice Research Initiative at Berkeley Law, Berkeley Law Executive Education, and the Berkeley Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice, July 31, 2020 (online)

“COVID-19 Business Closures, Firearms Dealers, and the Second Amendment” (with Josh Blackman), The Federalist Society, July 14, 2020 (teleconference)

“Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in the Time of COVID-19,” Alliance for Justice, July 2, 2020 (online)

“Corporate Conduct in the COVID-19 Crisis,” American Constitution Society, May 19, 2020 (teleconference)

“Access to Courts for Investors and Consumers,” Institute for Law and Economic Policy 2020 Symposium, Fordham University School of Law, New York, NY, February 28, 2020

“The Federal Judiciary and Civil Rights Jurisprudence During the Trump Administration,” (panel with Judge Shira Scheindlin, Dean Danielle Holley-Walker of Howard, and Jon Greenbaum), Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, Washington, DC, February 18, 2020

Guest lecturer, Advanced Civil Procedure, Columbia Law School (Suzanne Goldberg), February 17, 2020 

Keynote address, Goldmark Award Luncheon (honoring Chief Justice Mary Fairhurst of the Washington Supreme Court), Legal Foundation of Washington, Seattle, WA, February 14, 2020

The Supreme Court at Midterm Conference, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA, February 7-9, 2020

Keynote address, Annual Dinner of the Antitrust Section, New York State Bar Association, University Club of New York, New York, NY, January 30, 2020

“Arbitration in the #MeToo Era,” 2019 National Lawyers’ Convention, Federalist Society, Washington, DC, November 14, 2019 (panel moderated by Judge Joan Larsen, with Paul Clement, Andy Pincus, and Alex Colvin)

“The Complete Appellate Advocate: Beyond Brief Writing,” Appellate Judges Education Institute Summit, Washington, DC, November 14, 2019

Presented mock oral argument of Sali v. Corona, American Bar Association’s 23rd National Institute on Class Actions, Nashville, TN, October 18, 2019

Guest lecturer, The Practice of Aggregate Litigation, Vanderbilt Law School, Nashville, TN, October 17, 2019

Guest lecturer, Civil Rights Litigation Seminar, Howard University School of Law, Washington, DC, October 3, 2019

“Supreme Court 2019 Term in Review,” Maryland State Bar Association Annual Meeting, Ocean City, MD, June 14, 2019

“The Supreme Court and Arbitration: An Insider’s View,” with Andy Pincus, American Bar Association’s 12th Annual Arbitration Training Institute, Philadelphia, PA, May 17, 2019

Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, “Justice Denied: Forced Arbitration and the Erosion of Our Legal System,” Washington, DC, May 16, 2019

“The Supreme Corp.: How Corporate and Right-Wing Interests Captured the U.S. Supreme Court,” speech by U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and panel discussion led by Mark Joseph Stern of Slate, American Constitution Society and Center for American Progress, Washington, DC, May 8, 2019

“The Restatement of Consumer Contracts and the Future of Arbitration Clauses,” 13th Annual Judicial Symposium on Civil Justice Issues, Law & Economics Center, George Mason Antonin Scalia School of Law, Arlington, VA, May 6, 2019

Guest lecture, “Law for artists,” Professional Practice Seminar, Corcoran School of the Arts & Design, George Washington University, Washington, DC, April 15, 2019

The Supreme Court at Midterm Conference, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA, February 8-9, 2019

“Forced Arbitration and Your Future,” Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, January 17, 2019

“Pursuing Justice at Private Public Interest Law Firms,” Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, January 16, 2019

Keynote address, Consumer Federation of America’s 2018 Financial Services Conference, Washington, DC, Nov. 29, 2018

“Revisiting the Community Reinvestment Act,” (panel discussion moderated by Judge Joan Larsen), 2018 National Lawyers Convention, Federalist Society, Washington, DC, Nov. 16, 2018

“Private Antitrust Enforcement and the New Supreme Court,” 12th Annual Private Antitrust Enforcement Conference, American Antitrust Institute, Washington, DC, Nov. 14, 2018

“Consumer Rights in the Supreme Court and Appellate Courts” (plenary), Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, NCLC Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Denver, CO, October 27, 2018

“10th Annual Supreme Court Watch,” Seattle University School of Law, October 19, 2018

Guest lecturer, Civil Rights Litigation Seminar, Howard University Law School, Washington, DC, October 18, 2018

“A Conversation with Deepak Gupta,” University of California Berkeley School of Law, October 10, 2018 (sponsored by the American Constitution Society, Consumer Advocacy and Protection Society, Civil Justice Research Institute, and Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice)

Guest lecturer, Federal Practice Seminar (instructors Irv Gornstein and Judge Nina Pillard), Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, September 10, 2018

American Constitution Society’s Annual Supreme Court Preview, National Press Club, Washington, DC, Sept. 6, 2018

“The Supreme Court and Class Actions,” American Association for Justice Annual Convention, Denver, CO, July 8, 2018

“Cities v. Mortgage Discrimination,” University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, IL, May 17, 2018

“Protecting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Protecting Ourselves,” Just Economy Conference, Washington, DC, April 10, 2018

“Gaming in 2018: Christie v. NCAA and Beyond,” National Association of Attorneys General, Winter Meeting, Washington, DC, Feb. 28, 2018

“Ethics, Politics and Regulation in the Age of Trump,” Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, Amelia Island, FL, Feb. 26, 2018 (with Trevor Burrus and Richard Gottlieb)

“Consumer Rights in the Supreme Court and Appellate Courts” (plenary), NCLC Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Washington, DC, November 17, 2017

“Litigation as Resistance,” discussion with Professor Alexandra Lahav (sponsored by The Impact Fund), Howard University School of Law, Washington, DC, October 25, 2017

“The Emoluments Clauses,” Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, October 17, 2017 (sponsored by the American Constitution Society)

“The Emoluments Clauses: A Discussion 200 Years in the Making,” Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, September 25, 2017 (with Ilya Shapiro) (sponsored by the American Constitution Society and the Federalist Society)

ACS Coffee Chat, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, Sept. 25, 2017

“Guns in Public (Wrenn, Flanagan, Nichols & Norman),” Second Amendment Litigation & Jurisprudence Conference, New York, NY, October 17, 2017

“All the President’s Business Interests: The Emoluments Clauses and the Trump Administration,” American Constitution Society, Washington, DC, July 19, 2017

“Supreme Court Review,” with Judge Vince Chhabria, Pratik Shah, Kannon Shanmugam, Archis Parasharami, Loren Alikhan, and Tejinder Singh, South Asian Bar Association Convention, Washington, DC, July 14, 2017

“Standing After Spokeo,” Association of Attorneys General, Spring Consumer Protection Meeting, Washington, DC, May 15, 2017

District of Columbia v. Heller and the Second Amendment,” (moderated panel with Paul Clement and Jonathan Lowy), 2017 Judicial Conference, District of Columbia Courts: Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights, and Access to Justice, May 4, 2017

“Arbitration and Class Action Waivers: Has the Pendulum Swung?” Litigation Section Annual Conference, American Bar Association, San Francisco, CA, April 5, 2017

“Class Actions After Spokeo v. Robins: Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Article III Standing, and Practical Implications for the Bench and Practitioners,” Northern District of California 2017 Judicial Conference, Napa Valley, CA, April 29, 2017

“Practitioners and Scholars in Dialogue: What do we know about the civil justice system?” (symposium), Civil Justice Research Institute, UC Irvine School of Law, Irvine, California, April 28, 2017

“Staying on the Rails: Direct Constitutional Checks on the President,” moderated by Kate Shaw, Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy, Cardozo Law School, New York, March 28, 2017

“Hot Topics in Consumer Protection,” Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, New York, March 28, 2017

“Have Mandatory Arbitration Clauses Adversely Affected Consumers?” (debate with Professor Steven Ware), “Forcing the Issue: Mandatory Arbitration” (symposium), Loyola University Chicago School of Law, Chicago, March 17, 2017

“Trump, Gorsuch, and the Concentration of Economic Power,” speech by Senator Amy Klobuchar and panel discussion moderated by Sabeel Rahman, Center for American Progress, Washington, DC, March 13, 2017

“The Rise of Mandatory Arbitration and the Demise of Class Actions,” with Myriam Gilles, Seminar in Private Law, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, January 31, 2017

“Foreign Influence and the Presidency,” with Laurence Tribe, Joshua Matz, and Caroline Frederickson, American Constitution Society, Washington DC, January 24, 2017

“Conflicts of Interest: Holding the President Accountable,” Rise Above Conference 2017, sponsored by Lawyers for Good Government, Washington, DC January 21, 2017

“The Second Amendment and the Supreme Court: Confirmation Politics and Jurisprudential Challenges in 2017 and Beyond,” Second Amendment Litigation and Jurisprudence Conference, sponsored by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Washington, DC, December 7, 2016

“Has the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Helped Consumers?” (panel discussion moderated by Judge Edith Jones of the Fifth Circuit), Federalist Society, 2016 National Convention, Washington, DC, November 18, 2016

“The Future of Access to the Courts,” sponsored by the Supreme Court Institute and the Constitutional Accountability Center, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC, November 3, 2016

“Standing After Spokeo” (plenary session), National Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Anaheim, CA, October 22, 2016

“First Amendment Jurisprudence: What is Speech?” with Dean Robert Post and Amanda Shanor, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, September 15, 2016

“Supreme Court Review,” sponsored by the American Constitution Society and moderated by Tom Goldstein, National Press Club, Washington, DC, June 30, 2016

“Shifts in Gun Politics, Policy and Constitutional Law,” American Constitution Society’s National Convention 2016, Washington, DC, June 10, 2016

“First Amendment Issues in Consumer Payments: No Surcharge Rules and Content Discrimination,” with Eugene Volokh and Ilya Shapiro, Annual Public Policy Institute on Financial Services Regulation, George Mason University Law School,  Arlington, VA, June 8, 2016

“Reforming the Ripoff Clause: Why Access to Justice Matters for Accountability and the Economy,” with Senator Al Franken and Rep. Don Beyer, Center for American Progress, Washington, DC, June 7, 2016

Spokeo and the Present and Future of Class Actions,” Public Justice webinar, June 2, 2016

Briefing on Spokeo v. Robins, with Andy Pincus, Practicing Law Institute, June 1, 2016 

“Justice Scalia’s legacy in civil justice issues,” Tenth Annual Judicial Symposium on Civil Justice Issues, George Mason Law School, Arlington, VA, May 23, 2016 (lunch speaker)

Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, PLI, Chicago, May 13, 2016

Invited Testimony, Field Hearing on Arbitration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Albuquerque, NM, May 5, 2016

American Law Institute, “The Future of Aggregate Litigation,” at NYU School of Law, New York, NY April 12, 2016

“Pre-dispute binding arbitration,” AARP National Policy Council, Washington, DC, April 8, 2016

Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, PLI, New York, NY, April 4-5, 2016

Appellate Advocacy Seminar, Practicing Law Institute, New York, NY, March 21, 2016

“High Stakes: Anticipating the Supreme Court’s Decisions in Tyson, Spokeo, and Campbell-Ewald,” with Paul Bland and Scott Nelson, The Impact Fund Class Action Conference, San Francisco, CA, February 19, 2016

The Supreme Court at Midterm Conference, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA, January 29-30, 2016

Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Financial Services, “Examining the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Mass Data Collection Program,” December 16, 2015

ABA National Institute on Class Actions, panels on appellate advocacy and the Supreme Court’s docket, New Orleans, LA, October 17, 2015

“Barriers to Justice,” Yale ACS Conference on Law and Inequality, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, October 17, 2015

Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, “The Dodd-Frank Act Five Years Later,” Washington, DC, September 17, 2015

“Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy for the Little Guy,” Cosmos Club, Washington, DC, September 16, 2015

Testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, “The Administrative State v. The Constitution: Dodd-Frank at Five Years,” Washington, DC, July 23, 2015

Film screening and panel discussion, “Lost in the Fine Print,” with Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Nan Aron, Lorena Gonzalez, and Beth Terrell, Seattle, WA, June 30, 2015

“Seeking and opposing discretionary review,” Appellate Advocacy Seminar, Practicing Law Institute, New York, NY, June 2, 2015

Roundtable on Consumer Arbitration, Center for the Study of Private Law, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, April 8, 2015

“The Supreme Court, Article III Standing, and Class Actions,” Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, New York, NY, April 6-7, 2015

“Appellate advocacy essentials: framing issues, briefing, and oral argument,” National Consumer Law Center, presentation to seminar for experienced consumer lawyers in fair debt collection cases, Washington, DC, March 13, 2015

Panel discussion with U.S. District Judge Denise Cote (S.D.N.Y.), Professor Sam Issacharoff (NYU Law) and John Beisner (Skadden Arps) on “The Future of Class Actions,” New York City Bar, Federal Courts Committee, New York, NY, March 3, 2015

“Ascertainability,” a panel discussion with Elizabeth Cabraser and Scott Nelson, Consumer Class Action Symposium, Tampa, FL, Nov. 9, 2014

“Appellate strategies and developments,” with Brian Wolfman, National Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Tampa, FL, Nov. 7, 2014

Panel discussion with Nan Aron (Alliance for Justice), Linda Lipsen (AAJ), and Julianna Forlano accompanying D.C. premiere of “Lost in the Fine Print,” Washington, DC, Oct. 9, 2014

“The First Amendment meets consumer finance, or ‘Don’t like your review: Sue!’,” California State Bar, Aug. 21, 2014

“What plaintiffs’ lawyers need to know about appellate advocacy in an era of conservative courts,” Inner Circle of Advocates Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, August 14, 2014

“Recent Developments in the U.S. Supreme Court,” Class Action Litigation Group, American Association for Justice Annual Convention, Baltimore, MD, July 29, 2014

“Appellate Advocacy in Cases Seeking Corporate Accountability: Appealing to Conservative Judges,” Business Torts Section, American Association for Justice Annual Convention, Baltimore, MD, July 27, 2014

Law Seminars International’s 10th Annual Class Actions Conference, Seattle, WA, June 12 & 13, 2014

“Seeking and Opposing Discretionary Review,” Practicing Law Institute’s 2014 Appellate Advocacy program, New York, NY, May 8, 2014

Co-Chair, 18th Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, Chicago, IL, April 28-29, 2014

Guest lecturer on class actions and the Supreme Court, Cardozo Law School, New York, NY, April 23, 2014

“2014 Great Conversations Roundtable: Reforming Non-Bank Financial Institutions,” University of Maryland Law School, Baltimore, MD, April 16, 2014

“Mass Claims and Class Claims in Arbitration,” Institute for Transnational Arbitration of The Center for American and International Law and the American Society of International Law, Washington, DC, April 9, 2014

Co-Chair, 18th Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, New York, NY, April 7-8, 2014

“Making the Fine Print Fair,” symposium at Georgetown Law, sponsored by the Georgetown Consumer Law Society and Citizen Works, Washington, DC, April 4, 2014

“Supreme Court Review,” ABA National Conference on Equal Employment Opportunity Law, Rancho Mirage, CA, March 28, 2014

“Ascertainability as a Growing Threat to Class Certification,” The Impact Fund, Annual Class Action Conference, Oakland, CA, February 28, 2014

“Plaintiff-Side Appellate Advocacy,” lecture at Yale Law School, sponsored by the American Constitution Society, New Haven, CT, November 21, 2013

Debate with U.S. Senator David Vitter on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Dodd-Frank Act, Lousiana Bar Association, New Orleans, LA, November 15, 2013

“Regulatory Cases on the Supreme Court’s Docket,” panel with Tony Mauro, Andy Pincus, and Rachel Brand, National Law Journal Regulatory Summit, Washington, DC, November 13, 2013

National Consumer Law Center Class Action Symposium, Washington, DC, November 10, 2013

“Appellate Advocacy for Consumer Advocates,” National Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Washington, DC, November 7, 2013

“Supreme Court Roundup: What The Court’s Latest Opinions Mean for the World of Class Actions,” with Andy Pincus of Mayer Brown LLP, moderated by Professor Suzette Malveaux, at the 9th Annual Class Actions Conference, Washington, DC, October 4, 2013

Consumer Perspective, American Bar Association 4th Annual Institute on Consumer Financial Services Basics at the University of Maryland Law School, Baltimore, MD, October 1, 2013

“Will Class Actions Survive the Roberts Court?,” lecture at Loyola Law School, Chicago, September 27, 2013 “Supreme Court Labor and Employment Law Update,” Section of Labor and Employment Law, American Bar Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, August 8, 2013

“Arbitration Developments,” Class Action Litigation Group, American Association for Justice Annual Convention, San Francisco, CA, July 23, 2013

“U.S. Supreme Court Developments in Civil Rights,” Civil Rights Section, American Association for Justice Annual Convention, San Francisco, CA, July 22, 2013

“American Express v. Italian Colors,” Law Seminars International program with Archis Parasharami and Prof. Tom Stipanowich, July 23, 2013

“Dodd-Frank and Beyond,” panel with law professor Todd Zywicki and former SEC Commissioner Kathleen Casey, Federalist Society’s First Annual Executive Branch Review Conference, Washington, DC, June 11, 2013

“McBurney v. Young: the Supreme Court and Public Records Access,” seminar with Chris Mohr and Yianni Pantis, Law Seminars International, May 22, 2013

Co-Chair, 18th Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, Chicago, IL, May 2-3, 2013

“The New Era of Arbitration,” 46th Annual Pacific Coast Labor and Employment Conference, Seattle, WA, April 25, 2013

“Public Law Practitioners,” panel at American University, Washington College of the Law, April 10, 2013 Co-Chair, 18th Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, New York, NY, April 8-9, 2013

“Fair Lending,” American Bar Association, Business Section Spring Meeting, Washington, DC, April 5, 2013

“The Constitutional Challenge to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: A Debate” (with C. Boyden Gray, and sponsored by the Georgetown Center on the Constitution, the Federalist Society, and Consumer Law Society), Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC, March 21, 2013

“Seeking and Opposing Discretionary Review in the U.S. Supreme Court and State and Federal Appellate Courts,” 2013 Appellate Advocacy seminar, Practicing Law Institute, New York, NY, March 20, 2013

“Is the CFPB Constitutional?” (debate with C. Boyden Gray), American Bar Association, Consumer Financial Services Committee, Naples, FL, January 7, 2013

“The U.S. Supreme Court and Arbitration Wars,” American College of Business Court Judges, George Mason University School of Law, Arlington, VA, December 10, 2012

“The CFPB’s Amicus Program,” a joint Ballard Spahr and Gupta Beck webinar, November 21, 2012

“Arbitration and the Supreme Court,” National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, Washington, DC November 16, 2012

“Appellate and Supreme Court Advocacy on Behalf of Consumers” and “Litigating Preemption,” Annual Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, National Consumer Law Center, Seattle, WA, October 25-28, 2012

“Stacking the Deck: Consumer Rights in the Financial Marketplace,” event sponsored by Senator Al Franken, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, October 17, 2012

“How to Win Consumer Cases on Appeal,” National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Webinar, September 12, 2012

“Grappling with the Supreme Court’s Blockbuster Arbitration Cases,” Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association, Chicago, IL, August 3, 2012

“Litigating Preemption Issues,” Summer Mortgage Conference of the National Consumer Law Center / National Association of Consumer Advocates, Washington, DC, July 18, 2012

“Significant Changes in Consumer Law,” The Florida Bar Annual Convention, Orlando, FL, June 21, 2012

“Consumer Arbitration Update,” Teaching Consumer Law Conference, Center for Consumer Law, University of Houston, Houston, TX, May 18, 2012

Symposium on “AT&T v. Concepcion: One Year Later,” Cardozo Law School, New York, NY, April 26, 2012

Co-Chair, Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, Practicing Law Institute, New York, April 9-10 and Chicago, May 3-4, 2012 (sessions on arbitration, preemption, and the CFPB)

“Fine Print, Federalism, and the Fate of the Class Action,” Public Lecture, John Marshall Law School, Chicago, IL, March 22, 2012 (also guest taught administrative law class focused on agency design and CFPB)

“Federal Preemption Doctrine from a Consumer Perspective,” Symposium on Mass Torts in the Federal Courts, Charleston, SC, February 24, 2012

“Consumer Financial Protection After Dodd-Frank: The New Legislation’s Enhanced Enforcement Structure,” New York City Bar, New York, NY, March 8, 2012

“Plenary Address: Life After Concepcion,” 20th Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, Chicago, IL, November 4, 2012

“The Future of Consumer Arbitration & Class Action Waivers,” ABA Business Section, Boston, MA, April 15, 2011

Faculty, PLI Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, Chicago, IL, March 31-April 1, 2011

Guest Lecturer, University of Houston Law School, Houston, TX, Mar. 28, 2011

“The Future of Arbitration,” George Washington University Law School, Washington, DC, March 17, 2011

Guest Lecturer, Capital University School of Law, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2011

Guest Lecturer, University of Toronto Faculty of Law, Toronto, Canada, March 7, 2011

Faculty, PLI Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute, New York, NY, February 28-March 1, 2011

Speaker, “Arbitration and Class Actions,” Symposium on Consumer Class Actions, Boston, MA, November 14, 2010

“AT&T v. Concepcion: A Panel Discussion,” (with Randy Barnett, Brian Wolfman, and Ira Rheingold), Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC, November 9, 2010

“Appellate Advocacy From Desk to Podium, A Panel Discussion with Washington’s Finest Appellate Advocates” (with David Frederick, Irv Gornstein, Leondra Kruger, Cate Stetson, and Dori Bernstein), Georgetown Law Barristers’ Counsel, Washington, DC, October 27, 2010

“Consumer Law in the Supreme Court,” Consumer Law Society, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC, September 2010

Guest Faculty (with Carter Philips and Robin Conrad), “The Business of Justice: Corporate and Business Cases in the Roberts Court,” Summer Institute on Law and Government, American University, Washington, DC, June 2010

Guest lecturer (with Ralph Nader), “Topics in Consumer Protection,” Washington College of Law, American University, Washington, DC, June 2010

“Consumer and Civil Justice Cases in the U.S. Supreme Court: The October 2009 Term,” Conference on Teaching Consumer Law in the New Economy, Center for Consumer Law, University of Houston, TX, May 21-22, 2010

“Class-Silent Arbitration Clauses and Stolt-Nielsen: A View from the Supreme Court,” American Bar Association, Section of Litigation Annual Conference, New York, NY, April 22, 2010

“The National Motor Vehicle Title Information System” National Consumer Law Center, Webinar, March 18, 2010

Consumer Arbitration Study Group, American Bar Association, Section of Dispute Resolution, Washington, DC, January 2010

“National Motor Vehicle Title Information System,” 18th Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, National Consumer Law Center, Philadelphia, PA, November 2009

“Fighting for Consumer Justice: Challenges in a Changing Economy” (moderator), Equal Justice Works Conference, Washington, DC, October 2009

“Arbitration: Has It Fulfilled Its Promises?” American Bar Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, July 2009

“Ending Mandatory Arbitration: Strategies for Restoring Access to the Courts,” Symposium on “The Future of Public Rights Litigation,” Fordham Law School, New York, NY, March 2009

“Consumer Fraud Class Actions on Life Support,” American Bar Association, National Institute on Class Actions, Washington, DC, November 2008

“The Petition Clause, the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine, and Debt Collection Litigation,” 17th Consumer Rights Litigation Conference, National Consumer Law Center, Portland, OR, November 2008

“Conscientious Objectors: The Ethics of Representing Objectors to Class Action Settlements” Symposium on Consumer Class Actions, National Consumer Law Center, Washington, DC, November 2007

“Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Developments,” National Consumer Rights Conference, Miami, FL, November 2006