• February 7, 2017 | Legaltech News

    The Internet of Things Means a Big Dilemma for Big Law Discovery

    In November 2015, four friends gathered to have drinks and watch football. As sometimes happens when friends gather and alcohol is involved, a noteworthy story arose from the occasion. Unlik

    1 minute read

  • February 7, 2017 | National Law Journal

    The Internet of Things Means a Big Dilemma for Big Law Discovery

    In November 2015, four friends gathered to have drinks and watch football. As sometimes happens when friends gather and alcohol is involved, a noteworthy story arose from the occasion. Unlik

    1 minute read

  • February 7, 2017 | Legaltech News

    The Internet of Things Means a Big Dilemma for Big Law Discovery

    While devices like Apple's Siri and facial recognition technology used for security access may simplify and even expedite many of the tasks encompassing our daily lives, they pose considerable dilemmas, ranging from the ethical to privacy, ownership, and litigation.

    1 minute read

  • February 6, 2017 | National Law Journal

    Gorsuch Complained About Leaks by SCOTUS Clerks

    The U.S. Supreme Court nominee reacted strongly after former law clerks gave Vanity Fair magazine behind-the-scenes information about the court's decision in Bush v.

    1 minute read

  • Prather v. AT and T, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2017-02-06
    Practice Area: Government | Communications and Media
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Date Filed: 2017-02-06
    Court: 9th Cir.
    Judge: Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding Before: Ronald M. Gould and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges, and William K. Sessions III,* District Judge.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John G. Balestriere (argued) and Jillian L. McNeil, Balestriere Fariello, New York, New York, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    for defendant: Mark E. Haddad (argued), Collin Wedel (argued), and Douglas A. Axel, Sidley Austin LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellee AT&T.

    Case Number: No. 13-17489

    Cite as 17 C.D.O.S. 1080 JOHN C. PRATHER, on behalf of himself and the United States of America, and the several states of California, Delaware, Fl

  • Microsoft v. United States, 14-2985

    Publication Date: 2017-01-26
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Federal Government
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
    Judge: Before: Katzmann, C.J., Acobs, Cabranes, Pooler, Raggi, Hall, Livingston, Chin, Lohier, Jr., Carney, Droney, C.JJ.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Microsoft Corporation: Robert M. Loeb and Brian P. Goldman, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York, NY; Guy Petrillo, Petrillo Klein & Boxer LLP, New York, NY; James M. Garland and Alexander A. Berengaut, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, DC; Bradford L. Smith, David M. Howard, John Frank, Jonathan Palmer, and Nathaniel Jones, Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA; on the brief, E. Joshua Rosenkranz, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.
    for defendant: For Preet Bharara, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York: Serrin Turner, Assistant United States Attorney, on the brief, Justin Anderson, Assistant United States Attorney, New York, NY. For Amici Curiae Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, American Civil Liberties Union, The Constitution Project, and Electronic Frontier Foundation, in support of Appellant, Brett J. Williamson, David K. Lukmire, Nate Asher, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, New York, NY; Faiza Patel, Michael Price, Brennan Center for Justice, New York, NY; Hanni Fakhoury, Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Francisco, CA; Alex Abdo, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY. For Amicus Curiae Apple, Inc., in support of Appellant: Kenneth M. Dreifach, Marc J. Zwillinger, Zwillgen PLLC, New York, NY and Washington, DC. For Amici Curiae BSA | The Software Alliance, Center for Democracy and Technology, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, The National Association of Manufacturers, and ACT | The App Association, in support of Appellant: Andrew J. Pincus, Paul W. Hughes, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, DC. For Amicus Curiae Anthony J. Colangelo, in support of Appellant: Steven A. Engel, Dechert LLP, New York, NY. For Amici Curiae AT&T Corp., Rackspace US, Inc., Computer & Communications Industry Association, i2 Coalition, and Application Developers Alliance, in support of Appellant: Alan C. Raul, Kwaku A. Akowuah, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, DC. For Amicus Curiae Ireland: Peter D. Stergios, Charles D. Ray, McCarter & English, LLP, New York, NY and Hartford, CT. For Amici Curiae Amazon.com, Inc., and Accenture PLC, in support of Appellant: Peter Karanjia, Eric J. Feder, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, New York, NY. For Amici Curiae Verizon Communications, Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co., eBay Inc., Salesforce.com, Inc., and Infor, in support of Appellant: Michael Vatis, Jeffrey A. Novack, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, New York, NY; Randal S. Milch, Verizon Communications Inc., New York, NY; Kristofor T. Henning, Hewlett-Packard Co., Wayne, PA; Amy Weaver, Daniel Reed, Salesforce.com, Inc., San Francisco, CA; Orin Snyder, Thomas G. Hungar, Alexander H. Southwell, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; Mark Chandler, Cisco Systems, Inc., San Jose, CA; Aaron Johnson, eBay Inc., San Jose, CA. For Amici Curiae Media Organizations, in support of Appellant: Laura R. Handman, Alison Schary, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Washington, DC. For Amici Curiae Computer and Data Science Experts, in support of Appellant: Philip Warrick, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR. For Amicus Curiae Jan Philipp Albrecht, Member of the European Parliament, in support of Appellant: Owen C. Pell, Ian S. Forrester, Q.C., Paige C. Spencer, White & Case, New York, NY. For Amicus Curiae Digital Rights Ireland Limited, National Council for Civil Liberties, and The Open Rights Group, in support of Appellant: Owen C. Pell, Ian S. Forrester, Q.C., Paige C. Spencer, White & Case, New York, NY; Edward McGarr, Simon McGarr, Dervila McGirr, McGarr Solicitors, Dublin, Ireland.

    Case Number: 14-2985

    Cite as: Microsoft v. US, 14-2985, NYLJ 1202777615376, at *1 (2d Cir., Decided January 24, 2017)CASE NAMEMicrosoft Corporation, Appellant v. United States of Am

  • January 23, 2017 | National Law Journal

    5 Key Fixes That Will Improve Dodd-Frank

    When it comes to financial regulation and reform, one issue matters more than all others: systemic risk. In 2010, when Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act, its authors made choices that they be

    1 minute read

  • January 18, 2017 | The Recorder

    IRS Probe of Bitcoin Accounts Sparks Legal Showdown

    In a case testing the government's ability to unmask individuals who do business in cryptocurrency, San Francisco digital currency company Coinbase Inc. is challenging an IRS reque

    1 minute read

  • January 12, 2017 | New York Law Journal

    For Many Big Law Trump Donors, 'Stigma' Kept Support Below the Radar

    It was no secret during the presidential race that Donald Trump t

    1 minute read

  • January 12, 2017 | The Recorder

    IRS Probe of Bitcoin Accounts Sparks Legal Showdown

    SAN FRANCISCO — In a case testing the government's ability to unmask individuals who do business in cryptocurrency, San Francisco digital currency company Coinbase Inc. is challenging

    1 minute read