Technology Litigation

LEADERS

Patrick Doris

London

Lauren Goldman

New York

Rose Ring

San Francisco

VIEW ALL PRACTICE MEMBERS
VIEW ALL PRACTICE PUBLICATIONS
VIEW ALL PRACTICES

Overview

Gibson Dunn is known for handling more disputes for companies in the technology sector than any other law firm. We represent both established and emerging technology companies in their most important and complex disputes and have won some of the highest-profile technology cases in the past several years—in arbitration, at trial, and on appeal.

Our practice stands out for our deep understanding of our technology clients’ business models, our own technical expertise, and the remarkable breadth of high-stakes matters we handle in areas central to the tech industry, such as data privacy; founders’ disputes; intellectual-property fights; antitrust matters; employment issues; securities class actions; product liability actions; and contract cases.

Our deep understanding of our clients’ business models enables us to help them solve their problems in the manner that suits their needs, whether that means pursuing amicable resolution from a position of strength or taking a dispute to arbitration or court, through trial and appeal. Once engaged in a dispute, our litigators are adept at quickly mastering the details of our clients’ cutting-edge technologies and explaining them clearly, concisely, and effectively to courts, arbitrators, and juries. And even before a dispute emerges, in a rapidly developing regulatory environment, we know how to anticipate, precipitate, and leverage changes in the law that benefit our clients – and how to minimize the impact of changes that would chill innovation and dampen competition.

We know that our technology clients want outside counsel to be their partners — to understand their business imperatives and to help them advance their objectives efficiently and effectively with their legal and regulatory outlook in mind. Over the course of decades in this space, we have developed a deep bench of litigators with experience doing exactly that at the highest levels, for startups and trillion-dollar public companies alike.

In recognition of our work in this space, The Recorder named Gibson Dunn as its 2022 Tech Industry Litigation Department of the Year. The firm is highly ranked by Chambers and Legal 500 across several technology categories, including media, telecoms, information technology, and the internet. In recognition of its outstanding work, Benchmark Litigation presented Gibson Dunn with its Impact Award after the firm secured an antitrust victory on behalf of Apple in litigation against Epic Games related to the App Store marketplace.

EXPERIENCE & RECENT REPRESENTATIONS

  • Successfully represented Deutsche Telekom in a suit brought by the Attorneys General of 13 states and the District of Columbia seeking to block the acquisition of Sprint Corporation by DT’s subsidiary, a U.S. mobile phone carrier. In a landmark ruling following a two-week trial, the court held that DT’s $26.5 billion acquisition of Sprint Corporation did not violate Clayton Act §7, clearing the way for the transaction to proceed.
  • Obtained complete dismissal for Panasonic of antitrust litigation alleging price-fixing of inductor electronic components.
  • Defended Uber against Section 2 monopolization allegations on behalf of defunct rival, Sidecar, which claimed to have been forced out of business by predatory pricing. The California state law claims were dismissed with prejudice and its counsel was disqualified. Stipulated dismissal with prejudice was entered.
  • Successfully defended Chunghwa Picture Tubes in massive multidistrict litigation relating to alleged price-fixing of cathode ray tubes.
  • Secured a major victory defeating antitrust attacks from Epic Games relating to Apple’s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial, which was described in the press as “the Super Bowl of Antitrust,” the court ruled in Apple’s favor on all antitrust claims. Affirmed on appeal by the Ninth Circuit.
  • Secured a Supreme Court victory for Slack Technologies holding unanimously that plaintiffs suing under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 must plead and prove that they bought shares registered under the allegedly misleading registration statement. Slack Technologies, LLC v. Pirani (U.S. No. 22-200).
  • Successfully persuaded a unanimous Texas Supreme Court to dismiss all common-law claims against Meta in a case of first impression involving Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
  • Represented Meta in two landmark Supreme Court cases. In Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, the firm worked with co-defendants Twitter and Google to secure a major victory against claims of aiding and abetting under the Anti-Terrorism Act. The Court ruled unanimously in an opinion by Justice Thomas, agreeing with Gibson Dunn that fundamental principles of aiding and abetting incorporated into the ATA require that the defendant have aided the commission of the underlying wrong—in this case, a terrorist attack committed by ISIS—and that it is insufficient to allege that the companies aided ISIS generally by allowing adherents to post terroristic content on their sites. In Gonzalez v. Google LLC, where the firm represented Meta as an amicus, the Court adopted the course Gibson Dunn suggested, declining to reach the merits of a significant challenge to the application of Section 230 by the lower courts. These results highlight Gibson Dunn’s unparalleled expertise in preserving free speech and protecting online platforms from liability for third-party content.
  • Secured a major victory defeating antitrust attacks from Epic Games relating to Apple’s core business model. Following a three-week bench trial, which was described in the press as “the Super Bowl of Antitrust,” the court ruled in Apple’s favor on all antitrust claims. Affirmed on appeal by the Ninth Circuit.
  • Convinced the First Circuit, Third Circuit, and Massachusetts Supreme Court that the claims of drivers who use the Uber, Postmates, and Grubhub apps, respectively, may be compelled to arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act because they fall outside the statute’s exemption for workers engaged in interstate commerce.
  • Representing Meta in putative class actions challenging the collection and use of location data as violating California’s wiretapping law, constitutional and common-law privacy rights, and asserting claims for fraud and misrepresentation; obtained dismissal of one case and several claims in the other that made it possible to negotiate and obtain approval of a favorable class settlement resolving all remaining claims.
  • Representing Meta in putative class actions and a complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice asserting federal and state discrimination and consumer protection claims based on alleged algorithmic bias in ad targeting and delivery on Meta platforms; obtained dismissals of the class actions and resolved the government complaint through a negotiated resolution that the U.S. Department of Justice described as “groundbreaking” and “setting a new standard” for addressing algorithmic bias.
  • Successfully represented Yahoo in a high-stakes certified class action under the TCPA. Through strategic challenges to class certification and demonstrating individual consent issues, the team secured decertification, ultimately sealing Yahoo’s victory by persuading the court that Yahoo’s equipment did not meet the TCPA’s definition of an autodialer.
  • Representing iolo technologies, LLC in defense of putative nationwide consumer class action that challenged the company’s flagship PC optimization software. District Court dismissed action with prejudice based on the lack of standing.
  • Obtained repeated dismissals with prejudice (and successfully obtained affirmance by 9th Circuit) of consolidated class action against Yelp! alleging that it manipulated user reviews on behalf of advertising businesses on grounds that Yelp!’s automated review filter was protected under Communications Decency Act Section 230. Successfully dismissed factually detailed complaint by establishing that plaintiffs had failed to plausibly allege facts demonstrating that fluctuations in user reviews were due to extortion, as opposed to the good faith functioning of Yelp!’s content moderation algorithms, and by filing a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction with supporting evidence in parallel.
  • Achieved a favorable settlement for Square and its co-founders, Jack Dorsey and Jim McKelvey, shortly before trial in a founder dispute that included claims for breach of joint venture agreement, fraud, and misappropriation of trade secrets.
  • Secured a sweeping victory for Blink Health Ltd. and its co-founders, Geoffrey and Matthew Chaiken, in a lawsuit seeking a 5% stake in Blink.
  • Represented social media app Yik Yak and its two co-founders, Tyler Droll and Brooks Buffington, in a lawsuit brought by a former classmate alleging a significant ownership interest in Yik Yak.
  • Represented Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg in a high-profile breach of contract action brought by Paul Ceglia alleging a significant ownership interest in Facebook. Obtained expedited discovery developing substantial evidence of forgery, manipulation of digital evidence, and spoliation. Successfully moved for dismissal of the action as a fraud on the court and prevailed on appeal in the Second Circuit. Relatedly, represented Facebook and Mr. Zuckerberg as victims in the federal criminal prosecution of Plaintiff who was indicted on two felony counts for bringing the lawsuit.
  • Obtained a $441 million settlement for the founders and early employees of Tinder after a nearly four-week jury trial in their long-running legal battle against Tinder’s corporate parents Match Group, Inc. and IAC/InterActiveCorp, in which they alleged that Match and IAC intentionally low-balled the 2017 valuation of Tinder in order to deprive the founders of compensation they were owed under their stock options contracts.
  • Obtained a unanimous jury verdict for Hewlett-Packard Company after a three-week bench trial on contract interpretation and a five-week jury trial on breach and damages in the California Superior Court, which resulted in an award to HP of more than $3 billion against Oracle Corporation. This was one of the largest single-plaintiff jury verdicts in U.S. history, and the verdict, valued at more than $4.5 billion with post-judgment interest, was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal. The Daily Journal named the jury verdict, the highest verdict for California for the year, as one of its Top Plaintiffs’ Verdicts by Dollar.
  • Representing Meta in biometric privacy lawsuit brought by the State of Texas under the state’s Capture or Use of Biometric Identifiers Act.
  • Won summary judgment for Meta in high-profile consumer protection civil enforcement action brought by the D.C. Attorney General alleging that Meta made misleading representations and omissions about its data privacy policies and practices related to Cambridge Analytica.
  • Obtained dismissal of class action against leading mobile social gaming platform asserting that OpenFeint’s platform permitted unauthorized third-party access to personal and identifying information. Lead plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed action in response to our motion to dismiss.
  • On behalf of client DIRECTV, Gibson Dunn persuaded the Fourth Circuit to grant a Rule 23(f) petition presenting an unsettled question of personal jurisdiction. The case settled on favorable terms after the grant.
  • Won summary judgment dismissal of noninfringement for NetApp on the final two patents of a case in which Gibson Dunn was retained mid-stream by NetApp. Intellectual Ventures (IV), the largest patent holding company, brought the suit on five patents in the District of Massachusetts against NetApp’s data storage systems. Three of the patents were found invalid in IPRs.
  • Served as lead counsel for Uber in multi-patent dispute covering location-based and communication-based technologies in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Obtained complete dismissal in patent case for American software company after the court concluded that all asserted claims of Plaintiff Ginegar LLC’s two asserted patents were ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and granted Slack’s motion to dismiss with prejudice.
  • Representing Titan Global Capital Management in a lawsuit, in New York State Supreme Court seeking injunctive relief and damages against Fundit, asserting claims for tortious interference with contract and misappropriation of trade secrets, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and conversion. The parties entered into a confidential settlement on mutually acceptable terms.
  • Lead counsel for SharkNinja in five patent and false advertising litigation against competitor iRobot in district court. Argued and defeated iRobot’s preliminary injunction motion based on alleged infringement of three asserted patents, and successfully stayed and dismissed remaining patents.
  • Represented Riot Games in a high-profile class action lawsuit asserting gender discrimination claims. In 2022, the court approved a settlement that resolves claims filed by female workers, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”), and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”). The settlement is the first ever joint settlement among a private class, DFEH, and DLSE.
  • Successfully defeated certification of hiring, staffing, and promotions classes for Cognizant Technology Solutions in a lawsuit filed in the Central District of California, asserting violations of Title VII and Section 1981 on the basis that Cognizant allegedly prefers Indians and South Asians. Successfully defended Cognizant in a two-week jury trial on the one certified terminations class, resulting in a hung jury.
  • Scored a fantastic victory for Netflix, Inc., convincing the Los Angeles Superior Court to sustain a demurrer as to causes of action for harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against a Netflix Vice President, without leave to amend.
  • Scored a major victory for Meta Platforms, Inc. in the Northern District of California, winning dismissal with prejudice of a discrimination class action alleging that Meta favors visa-dependent workers in hiring.
  • Secured a temporary restraining order (TRO) in aid of arbitration on behalf of Capchase, Inc. against a former employee who breached his employment agreement when he sought to compete with Capchase by commencing employment with its competitor, Arc Technologies, Inc. Justice Joel Cohen of the New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division temporarily restrained Capchase’s former employee from working for Arc, ordered him to return any Capchase information in his possession, and granted Capchase expedited discovery (including third-party discovery as to Arc). After expedited discovery, the court granted Capchase’s motion for a preliminary injunction, affirming and expanding the scope of the TRO and rejecting the former employee’s arguments that because he performed work in Canada, the restrictive covenants were governed by Ontario law and therefore unenforceable.
  • Representing affiliates of the multinational tech conglomerate Tencent in purported class action litigation in California state court alleging unlawful censorship and surveillance related to its social media application WeChat.
  • Won summary judgment for Meta in high-profile consumer protection civil enforcement action brought by the D.C. Attorney General alleging that Meta made misleading representations and omissions about its data privacy policies and practices related to Cambridge Analytica.
  • Won dismissal for Binance of a proposed biometric privacy class action alleging violations of the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act (“BIPA”). Also defending Binance in litigation brought by the victim of a bitcoin hack who lost $80 million alleging that the hackers conspired with Binance in the theft.
  • Successfully represented Coinbase in a series of multiple litigations or subpoenas seeking user account information or asset freezes by demonstrating they were predicated on flawed blockchain tracing methodologies and by leveraging asserting domestic and foreign privacy laws (including GDPR), jurisdictional defenses, and refined blockchain tracing to protect user account records, including successful dismissal of third-party subpoena in federal court.
  • Secured dismissal for Xandr, Inc. of a class action complaint in New York federal court alleging violation of the UK GDPR related to personal data collected through advertising cookies.
  • Obtained a 9-0 win for Slack Technologies in the U.S. Supreme Court, after litigating in the Northern District of California and the Ninth Circuit, in key industry-shaping litigation regarding Section 11. It was the first securities and derivative suit relating to going public through a direct listing.
  • Secured a decisive post-trial victory in Delaware Court of Chancery on behalf of a major technology company in stockholder appraisal action arising out of acquisition.
  • Defending Okta, the leading identity verification company in the world, and its senior officers in the Northern District of California in a securities class action arising out of a data breach incident in early 2022. The incident received widespread media attention and preceded a significant drop in Okta’s stock price.
  • Secured dismissal, and affirmance by the Delaware Supreme Court, of a shareholder derivative action against the Board of Directors of Block (f/k/a Square) arising out of Square’s acquisition of the music streaming service TIDAL.
  • Achieved a significant victory by securing the dismissal with prejudice of a securities fraud class action against HP. The court granted the motion to dismiss, adopting all of Gibson Dunn’s arguments and dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims on falsity and scienter grounds. The case is now on appeal.
  • Obtained a unanimous jury verdict for Hewlett-Packard Company after a three-week bench trial on contract interpretation and a five-week jury trial on breach and damages in the California Superior Court, which resulted in an award to HP of more than $3 billion against Oracle Corporation. This was one of the largest single-plaintiff jury verdicts in U.S. history, and the verdict, valued at more than $4.5 billion with post-judgment interest, was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal. The Daily Journal named the jury verdict, the highest verdict for California for the year, as one of its Top Plaintiffs’ Verdicts by Dollar.
  • Achieved a major victory for Dell, VMware, and EMC by obtaining an unprecedented directed verdict in a $435 million patent suit against WSOU Investments. Despite challenging circumstances and a plaintiff-friendly court, Gibson Dunn’s trial-focused strategy and successful evidentiary motions led to a complete win, setting a significant precedent for other technology defendants facing WSOU’s claims.
  • Obtained a complete defense verdict for TikTok Inc. and ByteDance Ltd. in a $350 million federal trademark case. The firm’s trial team successfully argued that TikTok’s “stitch” tool did not infringe the plaintiff’s service mark, securing a unanimous jury decision and dismissing substantial damages claims.
  • Obtained a complete victory for Grubhub in an enterprise-threatening class action in the Northern District of California in which the named plaintiff, a Grubhub delivery partner, challenged his classification as an independent contractor and sought tens of millions of dollars of damages and civil penalties. A Gibson Dunn trial team led by Michele Maryott, Theane Evangelis, Ted Boutrous, and DJ Manthripragada cruised to victory as the court entered judgment in favor of Grubhub after the landmark, six-day, headline-grabbing trial in which Gibson Dunn crafted a creative, table setting strategy, removing the case to federal court and winning a rarely granted preemptive motion asking the judge to deny class certification.
  • Secured a complete trial victory for Fitbit in a high-profile, high-stakes patent case brought by Philips against Fitbit and Garmin in the International Trade Commission. The plaintiff had asserted patent claims against virtually all of Fitbit’s smartwatch and tracker products, and sought an exclusion order to stop Fitbit from importing or selling the products anywhere in the United States for the life of the patents. The ITC rejected these claims as invalid or not infringed, and rejected the plaintiff’s request to exclude Fitbit’s products from the United States. The Am Law Litigation Daily recognized the trial team with its “Litigator of the Week” award for its success.

RECENT PUBLICATIONS

Gibson Dunn Ranked in 2024 U.S. Legal 500

-June 12, 2024