Simmons keeps US tie-up on the table as part of growth strategy
Simmons & Simmons has told its partners that a transatlantic tie-up remains an option for the firm, despite the breakdown of merger discussions with Mayer Brown earlier this year. The UK top 15 law firm's management used its annual partner weekend earlier this month (9-10 October) to stress that while a US merger is not a key strategic target, management at the firm still considers it a possibility.
October 20, 2010 at 07:18 PM
2 minute read
Simmons & Simmons has told its partners that a transatlantic tie-up remains an option for the firm, despite the breakdown of merger discussions with Mayer Brown earlier this year.
The UK top 15 law firm's management used its annual partner weekend earlier this month (9-10 October) to stress that while a US merger is not a key strategic target, management at the firm still considers it a possibility.
The weekend saw management tell partners that despite the public attention received by the merger talks, which broke down over the summer, the firm's strategy for driving growth remains unchanged – with a merger an option but not a priority.
Instead, key strategic priorities for Simmons include bedding down the firm's four-way core sector focus on financial markets, life sciences, infrastructure, and technology, media and telecoms; as well as building on existing strengths such as its European litigation practice. China also remains a priority for growth after the firm added an office in Beijing earlier this year.
Managing partner Mark Dawkins (pictured) commented: "The basic message is that a US merger is not a driver of our strategy but that we remain open-minded about the option."
Simmons and Mayer Brown ended merger talks in June this year after some three months of discussions between the management teams. In addition to the US links a tie-up with Mayer Brown would have brought, Simmons was attracted to the deal because of the boost it would have given its China and Germany offerings. However, a number of partners had questioned the compatibility of the two firms' London offices.
- For more, see What now for Simmons after Mayer Brown fling?
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 AllA&O Shearman, Cleary Gottlieb Act on $700M Dunlop Tire Brand Sale to Japan's Sumitomo
Latham, Simpson Thacher and Brazilian Duo Ride Uptick in LatAm M&A
Kim & Chang, Freshfields, A&O Shearman Take Top Spots for Highest Collective Deal Value as APAC M&A Grew By Just 1% in 2024
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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