Supreme Court and Appellate Litigation

U.S. Supreme Court

• Hunter v. United States, No. 24-1063 (2026) – Concerning the circumstances in which criminal defendants may be excused from an otherwise categorical appeal waiver.
• Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton, No. 24-808 (2026) – Secured unanimous opinion that the reasonable-time limit in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) applies to a motion alleging that a judgment is void under Rule 60(b)(4).
• Ellingburg v. United States, No. 24-482 (2026) – Secured unanimous opinion that restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act is criminal punishment for purposes of the Constitution’s ex post facto clause.
• Barrett v. United States, No. 24-5774 (2025) – A double jeopardy case concerning whether a defendant can be sentenced for both carrying a gun and murdering someone with it during a crime of violence.
• Barnes v. Felix, No. 23-1239 (2024) – Whether courts should apply the “moment of the threat” doctrine when evaluating an excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Miller, No. 23-284 (2024) – Whether a bankruptcy trustee may avoid a debtor’s tax payment to the United States notwithstanding federal sovereign immunity or other federal-law defenses.
• E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, No. 23-217 (2024) – Secured unanimous opinion holding that the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies, rather than one of clear-and-convincing proof, when an employer seeks to demonstrate that an employee is exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime-pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• Medical Marijuana Inc., et al. v. Horn, No. 23-365 (2024) – Whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries are injuries to “business or property by reason of” the defendant’s acts for purposes of a civil treble-damages action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
• Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, 602 U.S. ___ (2024) – Secured 8-1 Supreme Court holding that district courts must apply the traditional four factors for preliminary injunctions—not a relaxed, pro-agency standard—when considering the National Labor Relations Board’s requests for preliminary injunctions under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act.
• Snyder v. United States, 603 U.S. 1 (2024) – Secured holding that 18 U.S.C. § 666, the government’s most-prosecuted statute, requires a quid pro quo in order to convict state or local officials of bribery.
• Atchley, et al. v. AstraZeneca UK Ltd., et al., No. 23-9 (2024) – Secured order granting certiorari, vacating an adverse D.C. Circuit judgment, and remanding to the D.C. Circuit for further consideration in light of Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh.
• Cantero v. Bank of America, 602 U.S. ___(2024) – Whether the National Bank Act preempts the application of state escrow-interest laws to national banks.
• Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 599 U.S. 140 (2023) – Secured holdings that (1) humorous use of another’s trademark as one’s own on a commercial product is subject to the Lanham Act’s traditional likelihood-of-confusion analysis, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1); and (2) humorous use of another’s mark as one’s own on a commercial product does not trigger the exclusions to liability for dilution by tarnishment under the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(3)(C).
• Harry C. Calcutt III v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., 598 U.S. 623 (2023) – Secured unanimous opinion summarily reversing the Sixth Circuit in favor of client Harry Calcutt. The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Circuit erred in upholding a FDIC disciplinary order against Mr. Calcutt after finding that the FDIC had made legal errors in adjudicating the case.
• Gonzalez v. Google LLC, 598 U.S. 617 (2023) and Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, 598 U.S. 471 (2023) – Successfully represented Google in case concerning the Antiterrorism Act (ATA), 18 U.S.C. § 2333 and in persuading the Court not to address the scope of Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act.
• Dupree v. Younger, 598 U.S. 729 (2023) – Whether to preserve an issue for appellate review a party must reassert in a post-trial motion a purely legal issue rejected in an order denying summary judgment.
• Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States, 598 U.S. 264 (2023) – Secured reversal and remand for further proceedings regarding scope of common-law immunity from criminal prosecution for foreign sovereign instrumentalities.
• Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Centro de Periodismo Investigativo, Inc., 598 U.S. 339 (2023) – Whether the Board can claim immunity from federal suits under the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act.
• Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508 (2023) – Secured holding that the Andy Warhol Foundation’s use of a copyrighted photograph does not favor the Foundation’s fair use defense to copyright infringement.
• Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, 598 U.S. 69 (2023) – Whether a bankruptcy debtor can discharge debts arising from someone else’s fraud under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A).
• Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. ___(2022) – Secured holding that a district court may consider intervening legal and factual developments when deciding whether to “impose a reduced sentence” on an individual under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018.
• Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. 482 (2022) – Secured holding on behalf of Erik Egbert, a U.S. Border Patrol agent, in a case involving whether to recognize constitutional damages actions against individual federal officers for First Amendment retaliation claims or for Fourth Amendment claims involving border-security-related functions. The decision was 9-0 as to the First Amendment claim and 6-3 as to the Fourth Amendment claim.
• Badgerow v. Walters, 596 U.S. __ (2022) – Whether federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under the Federal Arbitration Act when the basis for jurisdiction is that the underlying dispute involved a federal question.
• Sanchez v. Mayorkas, 593 U.S. __ (2021) – Whether, under 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(f)(4), a grant of temporary protected status authorizes eligible noncitizens to obtain lawful-permanent-resident status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255.
• Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., 594 U.S.180 (2021) – Whether, consistent with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, public school officials may regulate off-campus student speech that would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.
• Carr v. Saul, 593 U.S. 83 (2021) – Secured ruling that principles of issue exhaustion do not require Social Security disability claimants to argue at the agency level that the administrative law judges hearing their disability claims were unconstitutionally appointed.
• Salinas v. U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, 592 U.S. 188 (2021) – Secured holding that courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review Railroad Retirement Board decisions denying requests to reopen prior benefits determinations.
• Google v. Oracle, 593 U.S. 1 (2021) – Secured ruling in favor of Google that Google’s use of Java interfaces in creating Google’s Android system constitutes fair use.
• United States Patent & Trademark Office v. Booking.com, 591 U.S. 549 (2020) – Secured significant ruling in favor of client Booking.com that the addition of a generic top-level domain (“.com”) to an otherwise generic term can create a protectable trademark.
• Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, 590 U.S. 1 (2020) – Secured ruling holding that Superfund site landowners cannot sue defendants to implement an alternative cleanup plan that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not approved.
• Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., 590 U.S. ___ (2020) – Secured unanimous ruling holding that plaintiffs in trademark infringement suits are not required to show that a defendant willfully infringed the plaintiff’s trademark as a precondition to a profits award.
• Michigan Senate v. League of Women Voters, 139 S. Ct. 2635 (2019) – In April 2019, a district court invalidated Michigan’s congressional maps as unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders.  The Michigan Senate retained Williams & Connolly to oversee the stay briefing. On May 24, the Court took the highly unusual step of granting the stay, and on October 21, 2019, the Court vacated the judgment and remanded to the district court for further consideration in light of Rucho v. Common Cause, 588 U.S. 684 (2019).

Federal Courts of Appeal and State Appellate Courts

• UBS Financial Services Inc. of P.R. v. Efron, No. 23-13879 (11th Cir. 2025) – Secured affirmance of district court’s decision confirming arbitration award in UBS’s favor, holding that the arbitration panel did not violate FINRA rules or exceed its powers when determining the award.
• NLRB v. Starbucks, No. 23-1767 (6th Cir. 2025) – Secured holding vacating the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) monetary remedy as exceeding the scope of the NLRA.
• Starbucks Corp. v. NLRB, No. 24-1585 (8th Cir. 2025) – Secured holding that the NLRB did not apply the correct standard when it found that a store manager threatened and interrogated an employee.
• Humana v Biogen, et al., No. 24-1012 (1st Cir. 2025) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of civil RICO complaint.
• NLRB v. Starbucks, Nos. 23-1953 and 23-2241 (3rd Cir. 2024) – Secured holding vacating the NLRB’s monetary remedy as exceeding the scope of the NLRA.
  Favre v. Sharpe, No. 23-60610 (5th Cir. 2024) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of defamation claim brought by NFL Hall of Famer Brett Favre against former Fox Sports commentator Shannon Sharpe.
• In re Silver Lake Group, LLC Securities Litigation, No. 23-15822 (9th Cir. 2024) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of putative securities class action for failure to plead adequately that any of the defendants possessed any alleged material, non-public information at the time of their stock sales.
• Hickey v. Hospira, No. 23-30323 (5th Cir. 2024) – Secured reversal of lower court decision that preemption did not apply to plaintiffs’ claims in product liability litigation related to the chemotherapy medicine, Docetaxel.
• Caremark LLC et al. v. Choctaw Nation et al., No. 22-15543 (9th Cir. 2024) – Secured victory for CVS Health subsidiary Caremark and others before the Ninth Circuit holding that many of the Nation’s arguments challenging arbitration were foreclosed by the court’s previous decision in Caremark v. Chickasaw Nation, 43 F.4th 1021 (2022) and rejecting the Nation’s argument that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to compel arbitration.
• Efron v. UBS Financial Services Inc. of P.R., 96 F.4th 430 (1st Cir. 2024) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of RICO claim against client.
• Greenberg v. Lehocky, 81 F.4th 376 (3d Cir. 2023) – Successfully represented Pennsylvania Supreme Court Disciplinary Board in obtaining dismissal for lack of standing of First Amendment and due process challenge to attorney antidiscrimination rule.
• In Re: Zofran (Ondansetron) Products Liability Litigation, 57 F.4th 327 (1st Cir. 2023) – Secured affirmance of summary judgment in favor of client in multi-district product liability litigation involving more than 400 plaintiffs.
• Nunes v. Cable News Network, Inc., 31 F.4th 135 (2d Cir. 2022) – Secured affirmance of dismissal in favor of client in a defamation action brought by former Congressman Devin Nunes arising out of CNN’s coverage of the impeachment of President Trump.
• Nunes v. Washington Post Co., 20-7121 (D.C. Cir. 2022) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of defamation action brought by former Congressman Devin Nunes arising out of the publication’s coverage of information related to Rep. Nunes’s relationship with President Trump’s former acting director of national intelligence.
• Caremark LLC v. Chickasaw Nation, 43 F.4th 1021 (2022) – Secured affirmance of order granting CVS Health subsidiary Caremark, LLC and others’ petition to compel arbitration of a dispute with the Chickasaw Nation and five pharmacies that the Nation owns and operates.
• Edward Jones, Jr. v. Slade, et al., 23 F.4th 1124 (9th Cir. 2022) – Secured ruling in favor of client in an important case involving freedom of expression and religious liberty.
• Irving Firemen’s Relief & Retirement Fund v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., 998 F.3d 397 (9th Cir. 2021) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of complaint alleging securities fraud against Uber co-founder and former CEO Travis Kalanick.
• Kabokoff v. Zeneca Inc., No. 430-2020 (Del. 2021) – Secured affirmance of trial victory in a breach of contract action where plaintiffs sought $275 million in milestone payments under a merger agreement.
• Synchronoss Technologies Inc. v. Dropbox Inc., No. 19-2196 (Fed. Cir. 2021) – Secured affirmance of summary judgment in favor of client Dropbox in patent infringement litigation.
• JTH Tax v. Aime, 984 F.3d 284 (4th Cir. 2021) – Secured ruling in favor of our client that franchisee had not met the standard for relief based on newly discovered evidence, and rejecting the franchisee’s cross-appeal.
• CBE Grp v. Lexington Law Firm, 993 F.3d 346 (5th Cir. 2021) – Secured affirmance of judgment as a matter of law in favor of firm clients in fraud action.
• Cephalon Inc. v. Slayback Pharma LLC, No. 21-2134 (Fed. Cir. 2021) – Secured affirmance in favor of Teva’s branded division in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning Bendeka®, a drug with more than $2 billion in cumulative sales used to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
• Nowell v. Medtronic, Inc., No. 19-2073 (10th Cir. 2021) – Secured affirmance of trial court’s decision granting the company’s motion to dismiss with prejudice, holding that the applicable statutes of limitations barred all of the plaintiff’s state law claims.
• Glaxo Group Ltd. v. DRIT, 248 A.3d 911 (Del. Supreme Court 2021) – In a landmark implied-covenant contractual case before the Delaware Supreme Court, won reversal of a jury verdict against GSK awarding approximately $100 million in royalty payments.
• Apotex Corp. v. Hospira Healthcare India Private Ltd., 827 Fed. App’x 149 (2d Cir. 2020) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of claims alleging various tort claims and accompanying damages theories.
• In re: Mirena IUS Levonorgestrel, 982 F.3d 113 (2nd Cir. 2020) – Secured affirmance of the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Bayer Pharmaceuticals in multidistrict litigation asserting products liability claims related to Bayer’s Mirena birth control device.
• Dolin v. GlaxoSmithKline, 951 F.3d 882 (7th Cir. 2020) – Successfully represented drug manufacturer in connection with plaintiff’s bid to vacate the Seventh Circuit’s earlier decision that plaintiff’s inadequate labeling claims were preempted. In one of the first appellate decisions after the Supreme Court’s preemption decision in Merck v. Albrecht, the Seventh Circuit held that it would have reached the same preemption holding even after Albrecht.
• Google LLC v. Koninklijke Philips N.V., No. 19-1234 (Fed. Cir. 2019) – Secured ruling overturning an earlier decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) that had upheld a patent owned by Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV in inter partes review proceedings instituted by Google. In a unanimous decision, the Federal Circuit held that Google had shown the Philips patent was invalid as obvious.
• Eli Lilly v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, 933 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019) – The firm secured two successive victories before the Federal Circuit on behalf of its client Eli Lilly in matters against several generic drug manufacturers who challenged a patent protecting Lilly’s blockbuster anti- cancer drug Alimta®; subsequently defeated the challengers’ petitions for certiorari in the Supreme Court.
• Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. HSBC Bank USA NA, 34 N.Y.3d 327 (2019) – Secured a precedent-setting ruling from New York’s highest court that affirmed dismissal of claims seeking more than half a billion dollars against the bank.
• BP Exploration & Production, Inc., et al. v. Claimant ID 100281817, 919 F.3d 284 (5th Cir. 2019) – Secured reversal of a lower court decision holding that NBA player David West was entitled to damages resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
• United States, et al., ex rel. Paul Denis, v. Medco Health Solutions Inc., et al., No. 17-3562 (3rd Cir. 2019) – Secured affirmance of dismissal of False Claims Act complaint under the public disclosure bar.