The Recorder's Tech Litigation Department of the Year: Keker, Van Nest & Peters
The firm received the award Wednesday night at The Recorder's California Leaders in Tech Law and Innovation Awards based on its work on behalf of Electronic Arts, Google and Facebook
November 07, 2019 at 02:30 AM
5 minute read
The Recorder has named Keker, Van Nest & Peters as the 2019 Tech Litigation Department of the Year.
The firm received the award Wednesday night at The Recorder's California Leaders in Tech Law and Innovation Awards based on its work on behalf of Electronic Arts, Google and Facebook. Reprinted below is a Q&A The Recorder conduct with managing partner Steven Taylor upon the firm's selection as a finalist for the award.
What are the distinguishing characteristics of litigators that practice at Keker?
Steven Taylor: Excellence, ambition, creativity and teamwork. And a good sense of humor. We are a group of individuals with diverse backgrounds and interests, each of whom is accomplished, and together we are committed to achieving excellence for our clients. Lawyers here thrive working on high-stakes, difficult-to-win cases that require novel approaches and a fair bit of grit.
When a client comes to Keker for representation on a piece of litigation, what can they expect?
The best lawyers devoted to solving their most difficult problems. We invest time in understanding our clients, their operations, technology and goals to tailor our representation to their objectives. We're aggressive and passionate advocates, but also thoughtful representatives for our clients. Clients tell us often that they can find good lawyers, but it is much harder to find good people too, and our firm is the right combination of both. We want clients to be proud to have our lawyers represent them and their companies.
Our case teams are often much smaller than our counterparts, and everyone, senior partner to junior associate, plays a significant role in the case. Clients come to know, trust, and rely on our entire team. We think this approach allows our case teams to provide superior advocacy and service to our clients.
How does your firm gauge success on any particular litigation matter?
Each case has a different specific measure of success, but generally we ask: "Did we meet or exceed our client's expectations? Did we accomplish the client's goals?" Of course, we want to win a case, we are trial lawyers after all, but ultimately we want to do right by our clients. Sometimes that means aggressive trial advocacy through a verdict, but other times it's negotiating a quick settlement, or shielding them from government prosecution. We want our clients to walk away knowing we're fighting their fight, shoulder to shoulder, and bringing a trial-focused and strategic approach to their cases.
What ways is the business of litigation changing, and how are you adapting to those changes?
The business of litigation is ever-changing. Our firm is not organized into structured practice groups and our lawyers practice across several different areas of law, which keeps us nimble and able to adapt easily to changing practice demands. We've seen the mix of subject matters shift over time—patent has ebbed and flowed, while certain commercial litigation, antitrust, trade secret and employment disputes have increased of late—but because we haven't focused on a singular niche the demand for our services remains strong.
One challenge for us is developing the next generation of great trial lawyers in an era when fewer cases are making it to trial. We try to address this by actively pushing the professional development of our young lawyers early in cases and securing speaking roles during oral arguments, trials and arbitrations. We also actively seek out pro bono opportunities, assignments to the district attorney or public defender's offices, and in seeking other cases that can lead to professional opportunities.
We are also encouraged that many of our clients have voiced their commitment to increasing diversity in the legal profession. We've seen more requests for reporting diversity metrics and are having more face-to-face meetings discussing our diversity initiatives and client objectives. We have long maintained that our strength comes from the varied perspectives of a diverse group of attorneys for each case and for our firm as a whole. This has been part of our firm ethos since its founding, and we know that fostering diversity in the workplace requires thoughtful and continuous effort. We have consistently adjusted our internal processes and benefit offerings to help accomplish these goals.
It's not necessarily a new development, but we know that our clients are under significant pricing pressures and are looking to reduce legal spend or narrow the firms they use. We work with them on pricing and alternative fees, and we're conscientious about staying within budgets while meeting clients' litigation goals. We're grateful that our clients report that they are impressed with our work and that the firm has provided significant value.
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 AllJudge Asks: Should Tom Girardi Serve Sentence in a Medical Facility or Behind Bars?
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
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