Strategic Advice to Help You Avoid Privacy and Data Security Investigations and Litigation
Companies across all sectors rely on our privacy and data security experience to preemptively identify potential issues and avoid pitfalls. We understand the privacy and security challenges associated with current and emerging technologies – such as blockchain, artificial intelligence, cryptocurrencies, FinTech, cable and telecom – and have helped clients use and deliver these technologies effectively while avoiding regulatory impediments. We deliver practical advice that will help you stay out of trouble as you achieve your business objectives.
Discreet Management of Privacy and Data Security Investigations
Keeping your incident out of the news is one of our top priorities. By engaging us early to investigate your incident, we can work confidentially to help you understand the scope of an incident and the risks it poses to the company. If an incident is made public, we will continue to work with you to mitigate harm to the company’s reputation and interact with regulators and others to protect information that should remain confidential or privileged. And because our team includes former U.S. Department of Justice lawyers, we can collaborate effectively with law enforcement and the intelligence community, when appropriate, regarding incidents that implicate national security or involve foreign state actors.
Dynamic, Experienced Advocates in Digital Disputes
We are experienced litigators who are steeped in privacy and data security matters. We understand the intersection between cybersecurity risk and federal and state laws and can help you navigate digital disputes with civil litigants – in both complex civil litigation and multidistrict class actions; handle digital case management and digital discovery; respond to inquiries from regulatory agencies, such as the FTC, SEC, FCC and state attorneys general; and work with law enforcement regarding digital crimes.
Use this summary to help answer questions about state data breach notification requirements.
- Developing strategic litigation plans for companies introducing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning technologies into their traditional businesses.
- Representing cable provider in class action lawsuit alleging violation of privacy provisions of Cable Communications Policy Act.
- Representing a United States bank in connection with law enforcement and regulatory scrutiny of its practices regarding stablecoins and other cryptocurrencies.
- Representing multiple international companies in threatened and actual litigation flowing from business email compromises (BECs).
- Providing strategic litigation counseling in connection with use of a digital currency on a messaging application.
- Representing companies in litigation related to alleged SIM swap frauds.
- Preparing strategic litigation plans for multiple companies related to the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018.
- Preparing strategic litigation plans for companies related to their use of cryptocurrencies and other blockchain technologies.
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Thomas Robins. Submitted amicus brief on behalf of a group of eight media amici urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the 9th Circuit's ruling allowing a class action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act to go forward without any allegation of an "injury in fact" for standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, and highlighting the damage to media companies caused by class actions where plaintiffs leverage technical violations of privacy statutes to threaten enormous statutory damages, severely impacting those companies' business models, and chilling speech. (U.S. 2015)
- Lightspeed v. Smith. Won fees and sanctions for Comcast in district court (affirmed on appeal) in frivolous suit accusing Comcast and AT&T of "conspiring" to avoid disclosing thousands of subscriber’s identities to noted porn troll group for alleged copyright infringement. (S.D. Ill. 2013; 7th Cir. 2014)
- Riley v. California and U.S. v. Wurie. Submitted amicus brief on behalf of National Press Photographers Association, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and a coalition of media organizations, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to examine the constitutionality of warrantless searches of cell phone data incident to arrest. (U.S. 2014)
- Mortensen v. Bresnan Communications. Represented Internet service provider Bresnan Communications in federal privacy lawsuit challenging the use of ad-targeting technology. Won dismissal and currently on appeal to the 9th Circuit. (9th Cir. 2014)
- Valentine v. NebuAd. Obtained dismissal on lack of jurisdiction, on behalf of internet service provider Bresnan Communications in federal privacy lawsuit challenging the use of deep-packet inspection technology (2009). Won dismissal of ECPA claims in sister-case in Montana and in the 9th Circuit enforcing arbitration. (N.D. Cal. 2011; 9th Cir. 2013)
- ACLU v. Office of Director of National Intelligence, et. al. Secured for national civil liberties organization a federal court order in 2011 requiring more detailed explanation from agencies that withheld records under the Freedom of Information Act relating to intelligence community's use of sweeping electronic surveillance powers under the 2008 FISA Amendments Act. (S.D.N.Y. 2011)
- Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. Submitted amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of First Amendment rights of marketers and advertisers against Vermont statute requiring "opt-in" for any use of prescriber-identifiable data regarding prescription drug information. The Court held 6-3 that the state cannot restrict commercial speech for being too persuasive. Read the amicus brief. (U.S. 2011)
- N.C.W.C., Inc. v. Denton. Counsel to auto warranty marketer in challenge to state telemarketing law settled via favorable AG opinion (W.D. Tex. 2011)
- Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc. v. FTC. Counsel in litigation challenging the constitutionality of the national "do-not-call" telemarketing regulation. (10th Cir. 2004)
- Subpoena enforcement matter for national provider of broadband services and other ISPs. Federal appeals court defense of subscriber privacy claims under Digital Millennium Copyright Act; multiple proceedings in state and federal courts for ISPs responding to, quashing or objecting to subpoenas for subscriber information. (8th Cir. 2005)
- Madigan v. Telemarketing Assocs., Inc. Counsel for amicus American Teleservices Association seeking to limit state law and court decisions to fraudulent calls. (U.S. 2003)