Vinson & Elkins Closes Office in Beijing
The office closing is the latest step in V&E's scaling back from an on-the-ground presence in Asia
May 12, 2020 at 05:37 PM
4 minute read
Vinson & Elkins has shut down its Beijing office as the U.S. firm further retreats from Asia following a significant drop in oil and gas work in the region.
The firm has removed its Beijing office from its website, and the Hong Kong office is listed as "by appointment only" and has no resident lawyer.
V&E chairman Mark Kelly confirmed the closing of the Beijing office and said the Hong Kong office remains open, although the firm is evaluating its plans there going forward. The firm's Taipei office closed in October 2018, he said.
"We continue to work for clients in a variety of industries in Asia," Kelly said. "We remain committed to providing those clients the highest level of service and believe we are more than capable of doing so with our deep bench of lawyers positioned across our other global offices."
In Asia, V&E still has an office in Japan. Outside of Asia, it has offices in Dubai, London and Riyadh, as well as in the U.S.
But the office closings are yet another step in Vinson & Elkins's steady scaling back from an on-the-ground presence in Asia. According to data collected for the Asia 50 rankings, the firm had only 2 lawyers based in the Asia Pacific in 2018; that compared to 28 in 2013 and 39 in 2011.
Vinson & Elkins once had offices in six major business centers in Asia but ended up closing all but two—Tokyo and Hong Kong. In 1995, the Houston-based firm opened its first Asia office in Singapore, which it closed less than a decade later in 2004. After another decade, in 2014, the U.S. firm considered re-opening an office in Singapore as the city-state's government embarked on plans to globalize its legal market. But V&E partners were dissuaded by plunging oil prices in 2014 and 2015 and the Singapore re-opening never took place.
In Greater China, the firm first opened in Beijing in 1997 and added Shanghai and Hong Kong in 2005 and 2006, respectively. In 2013, V&E closed its Shanghai office to consolidate its China practice in Beijing and Hong Kong. From there on, the U.S. firm continued to pull back from what was one of the busiest China practices among all U.S. firms. Like many of its other offices, V&E's China practice focused almost exclusively on energy deals and caught the perfect wave of outbound Chinese investment in the oil and gas sector in the late 2000s and early 2010s, especially from China's state-owned energy giants.
Between 2009 and 2013, V&E represented the top three energy giants—China Petrochemical Corp. (Sinopec), China National Petroleum Corp. and China National Offshore Oil Corp.—on at least $35 billion worth of asset acquisitions, joint ventures and projects abroad. The deals included an $8.5 billion refinery joint venture between Sinopec and Saudi Aramco in 2012.
The situation first started to shift in 2013 when a sweeping anti-corruption campaign in China's state-owned sector put the brakes on big-ticket overseas investments. The following years also saw global oil prices drop to a decade low. And V&E's closure of Shanghai was followed by a series of partner departures, relocations and retirements. In 2017, former China head and longtime partner Xiao Yong led a team of lawyers in Hong Kong and Beijing to join Dechert.
In addition to oil and gas work in China, V&E had other offerings in Asia. In 2016, the firm launched a Taipei office focusing on intellectual property litigation work. To run the practice, it hired patent litigators Christopher Kao and David Tsai from Perkins Coie in 2015, but the duo left to open a Taipei office for Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman in 2018.
Tokyo is now V&E's only office in Asia that has resident lawyers. That office, opened in 2004, also has a focus on intellectual property work. Partner Jennifer Chen, a former Hitachi in-house counsel, manages the office.
"Our firm's long-term strategic plans include having a strong footprint in Asia and we intend to grow our presence there at the appropriate time," Kelly said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute readIn Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250