Matt Johnson’s practice focuses on all areas of complex civil litigation.  He has been trial counsel in a broad range of matters both across the United States and internationally.

Matt’s recent representations include defending several major financial institutions in litigation concerning the origination, sale, and securitization of residential mortgage loans; representing companies in cases relating to the reporting and use of personal and commercial data; representing companies in cases involving trademark and false advertising claims; and representing a medical technology company in patent licensing litigation in Sweden.  Matt also has extensive experience in all phases, including at trial, defending against products liability claims in various federal and state courts.

Originally from Chaska, Minnesota, Matt studied overseas in Sweden, (1993-1994), Spain, (1996-1997), and Germany (2000). Matt received his B.S., cum laude, from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. He earned his J.D., cum laude, from Georgetown University Law Center, where he was Executive Special Projects Editor of the Georgetown Law Journal.  Matt then clerked for Judge David O. Carter of the United States District Court for the Central District of California before joining Williams & Connolly.

Representative Experience

Though all cases vary and none is predictive, Matt’s recent experience includes:

  • Lead trial counsel in a multi-week trial in federal court in St. Paul, Minnesota defending a mortgage originator in an indemnification action brought by the successor to a former mortgage securitizer.  The case remains active. 
  • Lead trial counsel in a multi-week jury trial in federal court in St. Paul, Minnesota defending a former mortgage originator against claims involving residential mortgage-backed securities.  It was one of the country’s first cases involving RMBS to be tried to a jury.  The case remains active.
  • Co-trial counsel in multi-week arbitration in Stockholm, Sweden defending a Swedish medical technology company against claims that it breached a patent licensing agreement.  The arbitral panel’s decision provided a complete defense victory.
  • Co-trial counsel in a multi-week jury trial in federal court in Portland, Oregon defending an electronic test tools company against claims of comparative false advertising while asserting trademark infringement, unfair competition and false advertising counterclaims.  After a jury returned verdicts in favor of the defendant/counterclaim plaintiff, the case was settled.

Education

Clerkships

Recognitions

Selected to Washington, D.C. “Rising Stars” list, Super Lawyers, 2013

Admissions

back to top