Notable Representations, Key Contacts
Experienced and highly credentialed team
Our seasoned appellate lawyers have successfully prosecuted and defended precedent-setting appeals in the U.S. Supreme Court, all 13 federal circuit courts, intermediate appellate and supreme courts of numerous states, and high courts of foreign countries.
Our team includes many former clerks to federal appellate judges and U.S. Supreme Court justices, constitutional scholars, and a former Assistant Solicitor General for the State of New York.
Broad range of substantive appellate experience
Weil’s appellate experience includes securities, copyright and trademark, patent, tax, professional malpractice, bankruptcy, complex business torts, antitrust, civil rights, and constitutional law, among other areas.
Highly effective appellate advocacy
We are effective in any appellate situation, whether it be obtaining mandamus relief on behalf of corporate defendants facing unwieldy discovery demands, challenging the applicability or constitutionality of unfairly applied statutory schemes, enforcing arbitration rights, defending nationwide class actions, or overturning large jury verdicts in product liability cases.
We routinely litigate questions of first impression and novel legal theories, interpreting complex statutes and regulations in specialized and uncharted areas of the law, as well as cutting-edge scientific and technological issues.
Well-respected patent appeals practiceLed by partner Edward Reines in the Silicon Valley office, Weil is regularly called upon to handle its clients’ most important patent litigation appeals before the Federal Circuit.
Weil achieved a decisive appellate win for Sanofi, its subsidiary Genzyme Corp., and certain executives in one of the most impactful securities cases in recent memory. In March 2016, the Second Circuit affirmed in its entirety the dismissal by the S.D.N.Y. of a securities fraud class action and a related case for securities fraud arising out of statements regarding the results of Phase 3 clinical trials for a multiple sclerosis drug and its prospects for FDA approval. Notably, the opinion is the first by the Second Circuit to address the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent, seminal Omnicare decision, which articulated the standard for securities fraud liability for allegedly misleading statements of opinion. John Neuwirth, co-head of Weil’s Securities Litigation practice, was named “Litigator of the Week” by The Am Law Litigation Daily, which noted that “investors still face a high bar in federal court in New York—home of one of the busiest securities dockets in the country.”
Weil secured a unanimous decision from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirming a lower court’s summary judgment ruling for various Marvel entities and their parent The Walt Disney Company (collectively, Marvel) in a widely-followed copyright ownership dispute between Marvel and the heirs of Jack Kirby. Kirby was a noted comic book artist who worked for Marvel for decades, including during the late 1950s and early 1960s, when Marvel created many of its iconic comic book superheroes such as The Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Thor, The Incredible Hulk, and The X-Men. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Weil’s clients in 2011. On appeal, the Second Circuit issued a precedential decision unanimously upholding the summary judgment ruling, and rejected all of the Kirby heirs’ arguments concerning copyright ownership, finding that the undisputed evidence established that the works at issue were created for Marvel as works made for hire as a matter of law.
Weil obtained a significant, precedent-setting victory for Marsh before the Second Circuit that provides for the first time a solid framework supporting the right of a company to terminate an employee who fails to cooperate in an internal investigation of alleged wrongdoing. In this action, two former Marsh executives sought to obtain severance benefits and the value of stock options forfeited when they were terminated in the aftermath of a New York state investigation into the practice of “contingent commissions” and alleged bid-rigging. In June 2012, the S.D.N.Y. dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process on the pleadings, and in January 2015 the court granted Marsh’s summary judgment motion, dismissing Plaintiffs’ remaining claims for severance benefits under ERISA and for the value of their forfeited equity awards under state law. Then, in June 2016, following oral argument, the Second Circuit affirmed.
Weil secured a Federal Circuit affirmation of a Patent Office decision on behalf of Illumina in one of the first appeals of an inter partes review decision. In 2012 Columbia University sued Illumina in the D. Del. for infringement of patents that allegedly cover next-generation DNA sequencing technology. Columbia accused Illumina’s entire product line of infringement, including Illumina’s $740,000 high throughput HiSeq sequencers, and requested injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In response, Illumina submitted petitions with the Patent Office to have Columbia’s patents placed under inter partes review. After Illumina prevailed in the Patent Office, Illumina brought on Weil for Columbia’s appeal. Being one of the first appeals of an inter partes review decision, there were substantial open issues as to how the Federal Circuit would review such decisions, including whether patent owners would be given leeway to amend claims to target accused infringers, which Columbia had attempted to do. In addition, the appeal raised new challenges regarding the presentation of a technical Patent Office record to an appellate court panel. After briefing was submitted, during oral argument in April 2015 Weil focused the case down to a single technical issue, and blunted Columbia’s evidence of willful infringement and copying with evidence of independent invention. In July 2015, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Office’s decisions on every point, and ruled that Columbia would not be permitted to amend its claims.
Weil won a high-profile appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court for Schindler Elevator Corp. in Schindler Elevator Corporation, Petitioner v. United States, ex rel. Daniel Kirk, a case interpreting the public-disclosure bar of the False Claims Act. This case had been closely watched by the business community and was of considerable importance to federal contractors doing business with the federal government.
Weil is currently recognized as one of the top 25 firms nationwide for appellate litigation.
Weil secured affirmance in the Second Circuit of a pair of earlier victories on behalf of DMX Inc. against ASCAP and BMI in a landmark ruling that could change the way music performance rights are licensed, according toThe AmLaw Litigation Daily.
As reported in The Wall Street Journal, Justice Sotomayor described Weil’s amicus curiae brief on behalf of the European Union in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, as a "simple set of rules...clearly defined...that...makes sense", challenging advocates to explain why they disagreed with our client’s position.