Recent Appellate and Supreme Court Matters:

  • NetChoice v. Atty Gen. State of Florida (S.D. Fla./11th Cir.): Representing Netchoice, a trade association of Internet and social media companies, in First Amendment lawsuit challenging a Florida statute attempting to regulate social media companies’ exercise of editorial discretion on their platforms; preliminary injunction of statute granted and key provisions affirmed on appeal.
  • Twitter v. Paxton, (9th Cir.):  Represent trade associations of Internet and social media companies in amicus brief arguing that the Texas Attorney General's investigation of Twitter violated its First Amendment rights.   See more here.
  • In re: Incretin-Based Therapies Products Liability Litigation, Adams v. Novo Nordisk (9th Cir. 2022):  Briefed and argued appeal for Novo Nordisk successfully defending dismissal at summary judgment of all claims in multi-district litigation on Daubert and preemption grounds.  
  • In re: Taxotere (Docetaxel) Product Liability Litigation (5th Cir. & EDLA 2019-present):  Lead appellate counsel for Sanofi handling all appeals and critical motions arising out of the multi-district litigation, including successful defense of dismissals and summary judgment on grounds of warnings causation, statute of limitations, and violations of show-cause procedure.   
  • Jones v. Medtronic (9th Cir. 2021):  The Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of plaintiff’s claims on personal jurisdiction grounds and based on the plaintiff’s failure to plead facts sufficient to establish failure to warn, design and manufacturing defects, and adulteration and misbranding claims.
  • Furman v. Goodyear Tire (NM S. Ct. 2021):  Ilana argued against personal jurisdiction on behalf of Goodyear Tire in a February 2021 argument which were held before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Ford decision.   
  • Lawrence v. Medtronic (9th Cir. 2020): Represented Medtronic in Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming dismissal of a products liability suit against Medtronic Inc. on preemption grounds.
  • Microsoft v. United States, No. 17-2 (S. Ct. 2018): Author of brief on behalf of amici curiae DIGITALEUROPE, Syntec Numérique, and other European national trade organizations asking the Court to consider the potential conflict between the Stored Communications Act and the GDPR
  • * Howell v. Howell, 137 S. Ct. 1400 (2017): Briefed and argued case in US Supreme Court involving federal preemption of state-court division of military disability benefits 
  • * Manuel v. City of Joliet, 137 S. Ct. 911 (2017): Briefed and argued case finding that pre-trial detention without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment and may give rise to a federal civil rights claim 
  • * Menominee Tribe v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 750 (2016): Briefed and argued case which clarified proper application of equitable tolling principles in a contracting dispute with the federal government on firearms by domestic abusers 
  • * Ohio v. Clark, 135 S. Ct. 2173 (2015): Briefed and argued case finding Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause to be inapplicable to out-of-court statements given by an abused child to his teacher 

(*) – cases before joined DLA piper while in government service

Multi-District Litigation and Trial Court Litigation 

  • In re: Generics Pharmaceutical Pricing Antitrust Litigation (ED Pa. 2019-present): Lead counsel defending major pharmaceutical manufacturer against antitrust claims brought by state Attorneys General and private class actions in the multi-district litigation, 
  • In re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation (SD Fla. and 11th Cir. 2020-present):  handling class action defense and government enforcement actions for major pharmaceutical company in the multi-district litigation and related state court proceedings.  
  • Merck v. Pfizer (ED. Pa. 2020-21):  Defended Pfizer against trade-secret misappropriation lawsuit

 

Affirmative Government Litigation

  • Pfizer v. Dept of Health and Human Services:  Counsel for Pfizer in administrative law and constitutional challenge to agency interpretation of the Anti-Kickback Statute as prohibiting copay assistance for patients to afford a breakthrough treatment for a rare and fatal disease. 
  • Safehouse v. U.S. Department of Justice:  Lead counsel for Safehouse in declaratory judgment and constitutional litigation challenging application of federal drug laws to prevent provision of overdose prevention services.