King & Spalding Resists WhatsApp's 'Drastic' Disqualification Bid in Cyber Case
A team from King & Spalding, including former partner and now FBI Director Christopher Wray, provided legal services to WhatsApp in a sealed matter four years ago. WhatsApp's counsel at Cooley says the firm acquired confidential information relevant to a pending case where King & Spalding represents a WhatsApp adversary.
May 30, 2020 at 08:51 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
King & Spalding's prior legal work for WhatsApp Inc. should not disqualify the firm from representing an adversary that was sued by the popular text messaging service in California federal court, lawyers for the firm told a judge Friday.
WhatsApp, represented by Cooley LLP, sued King & Spalding client NSO Group Technologies last year over claims the Israeli cybertechnology company exploited the messaging platform in an effort to gain unauthorized access to user communication. NSO has denied the allegations.
WhatsApp's lawyers contend King & Spalding's work for the company in a sealed matter four years ago has given the firm an unfair advantage in the pending case in Oakland's federal trial court. The Cooley lawyers argued in their disqualification papers that the lawsuit against NSO is substantially related to the earlier sealed matter and that King & Spalding acquired confidential information material to the pending litigation.
On Friday, King & Spalding's lawyers at Long & Levit disputed that the two cases are related, and they argued that three of the four King & Spalding lawyers who worked on the earlier sealed matter are no longer at the law firm. One of those attorneys, Christopher Wray, a former white-collar partner, was confirmed in 2017 as the FBI director.
"Disqualification is a drastic, disfavored and disruptive remedy that is unwarranted here," San Francisco lawyer Jessica MacGregor of Long & Levit said in the new court filing. MacGregor argued that "depriving NSO of highly skilled counsel of its choice will impose significant hardship and prejudice."
New filings in the case in April led to widespread public attention that contrasted Wray's advocacy for WhatsApp as a private lawyer and his statements as FBI director questioning technological barriers that can impede law enforcement investigations.
Indeed, FBI and Justice Department leaders have long clashed with Silicon Valley over encryption.
"Like all other lawyers, [Wray's] duty of loyalty was to his client, and he did not put his personal views ahead of his clients' interests or allow them to affect the legal work he did for clients," the FBI said in a statement in April, according to The Wall Street Journal. "Today, as director of the FBI, his duty is to act in the best interests of the American people."
Wray had been a partner at King & Spalding for 12 years before he left the firm to join the Trump administration in 2017. He reported earning more than $14 million from the firm in the years leading up to his departure, according to financial disclosure filings that are mandatory for many senior-level executive branch employees. His clients included Credit Suisse Group, Johnson & Johnson, Wells Fargo and Chevron, the disclosures showed. He declined to identify three confidential clients who at the time were subject to nonpublic investigations.
Cooley lawyers representing WhatsApp assert that King & Spalding acquired information about confidential aspects of the messaging service's platforms when the firm provided legal advice to the company in 2015 and 2016.
The current case "involves the very technology that WhatsApp previously hired King & Spalding to analyze and protect," the Cooley lawyers said.
"King & Spalding is violating a bedrock requirement of attorney loyalty: the duty to avoid switching sides and opposing a client that it once represented," Cooley partner Michael Rhodes said in a filing in April.
Rhodes said in the filing: "Put simply, no client would ever expect to reveal the proprietary and nonpublic details of its product to its lawyers, only to find those lawyers acting adversely to it a few years later on a case involving the same technology and on behalf of a client that marketed and sold the ability to attack and exploit its network."
King & Spalding billed WhatsApp about 94 hours of work on the sealed matter, Long & Levit's MacGregor said in Friday's filing. Wray worked for WhatsApp with King & Spalding lawyers Paul Mezzina, Nick Oldham and Cathy O'Neil, who has since died. Oldham left the firm in 2017 and now serves as the chief privacy and data governance officer at Equifax. Mezzina rejoined the firm earlier this year after clerking for Justice Neil Gorsuch on the U.S. Supreme Court.
NSO retained King & Spalding after a three-month search for a firm to defend the company against WhatsApp's claims. The company said it sought a firm with a bench in cybersecurity, government relations and national security, according to court records. Many firms, MacGregor said, faced conflicts based on work for Facebook, which owns WhatsApp.
"Forcing a change in counsel will send NSO back into a diminished legal marketplace dominated by Facebook," MacGregor wrote. "NSO will also lose the benefit of the significant work K&S has already performed and would have to shoulder the increased expense of beginning anew with replacement counsel."
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 AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readCars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
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