Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Aditya Bamzai is a professor of law at the University of Virginia. He teaches administrative law, civil procedure, computer crime and conflicts of law, and he has written about these and related subjects. He has argued cases relating to the separation of powers and national security in the U.S. Supreme Court, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, D.C. Circuit and other federal courts of appeals. From 2019 to 2021, he served as a Member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, a federal agency charged with ensuring that the government’s national security efforts are balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties. Before entering the academy, Bamzai was an attorney-adviser in the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice, and an appellate attorney in both private practice and for the National Security Division of the Department of Justice. Earlier in his career, he was a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States and to Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Partner, Kirkland and Ellis, LLP
John O'Quinn is a Partner in Kirkland's Washington, D.C. office. His practice focuses on litigation, including intellectual property disputes, commercial litigation, regulatory issues arising from or likely to lead to litigation, and other complex litigation matters at both the trial and appellate levels. He has extensive argument experience before both trial and appellate courts, and has argued in most of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, including the D.C. Circuit and the Federal Circuit. Mr. O'Quinn has been to trial multiple times, where he has examined expert and fact witnesses. Representative clients include Apple, Boeing, B. Braun Medical, Charter Communications, C.R. Bard, POET LLC, Siemens, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.
From 2006 to 2009, Mr. O'Quinn served in the United States Department of Justice. As Deputy Associate Attorney General, he was responsible for helping to oversee much of the government's civil litigation and reviewing proposed settlements of multi-million dollar civil cases brought by or against the government. As the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Federal Programs Branch of the Civil Division, Mr. O'Quinn supervised over 100 attorneys charged with defending the constitutionality of federal statutes and regulations, representing the diplomatic and national security interests of the United States in court, and conducting significant Title VII, personnel, social security, Medicare and Medicaid-related litigation. Mr. O'Quinn worked with counsel from virtually every federal agency on complex civil litigation matters and personally directed significant cases defending the government's interests, arguing more than 20 cases in federal court. In February of 2009, Mr. O'Quinn was awarded the Office of the Secretary of Defense Medal for Exceptional Public Service for his leadership in defending the Department of Defense in lawsuits challenging the detention and trial of enemy combatants captured abroad by United States Armed Forces.
Mr. O'Quinn was previously an associate with Kirkland from 2003 to 2006. While on leave from the Firm, he served as special counsel to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary for the nomination of Chief Justice Roberts. Prior to joining the Firm, Mr. O'Quinn was a law clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court and Judge David Sentelle of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
While at Kirkland, Mr. O'Quinn has also provided legal counseling and representation for individuals and organizations on a pro bono basis, including arguing a habeas petition on behalf of a defendant convicted of capital murder, and submitting FOIA requests on behalf of a civil rights organization.
President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
Geoffrey A. Manne is the president and founder of the International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE), a nonprofit, nonpartisan research center based in Portland, Oregon. He is also a distinguished fellow at Northwestern Law School’s Searle Center on Law, Regulation, & Economic Growth. In April 2017 he was appointed by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to the FCC’s Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee, and he recently served for two years on the FCC’s Consumer Advisory Committee.
Mr. Manne earned his JD and AB degrees from the University of Chicago and is an expert in the economic analysis of law, specializing in competition, telecommunications, consumer protection, intellectual property, and technology policy.
Prior to founding ICLE, Manne was a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School. From 2006-2009, he took a leave from teaching to develop Microsoft’s law and economics academic outreach program. Manne has also served as a lecturer in law at the University of Chicago Law School and the University of Virginia School of Law. He practiced antitrust law and appellate litigation at Latham & Watkins, clerked for Hon. Morris S. Arnold on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, and worked as a research assistant for Judge Richard Posner. He was also once (very briefly) employed by the FTC.
Mr. Manne’s publications have appeared in numerous journals including the Journal of Competition Law and Economics, the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, the Supreme Court Economic Review, and the Arizona Law Review, among others. With former FTC Commissioner, Joshua Wright, Manne is the editor of a volume from Cambridge University Press entitled, Competition Policy and Intellectual Property Law Under Uncertainty: Regulating Innovation. Manne has also testified on several occasions before Congress and at the FCC and FTC, and he regularly files written comments and amicus briefs on key antitrust, IP, and telecommunications issues. His analysis is frequently published in popular print and broadcasting outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Wired, Foreign Affairs, NPR, and Bloomberg, among others.
Manne is a member of the American Law and Economics Association, the Canadian Law and Economics Association, and the Society for Institutional & Organizational Economics. He blogs at Truth on the Market (www.truthonthemarket.com) (of which he is also the co-founder), is a contributor at WIRED, and tweets at @geoffmanne. His scholarly publications are available at http://ssrn.com/author=175541.
Director of Innovation Policy, International Center for Law & Economics
Kristian Stout, ICLE’s Director of Innovation Policy is an expert in intellectual property, antitrust, telecommunications, and Internet governance. Kristian has been a Fellow at the Internet Law & Policy Foundry, as well as the Eagleton Institute of Politics. Before practicing law, Kristian worked as a technology entrepreneur and a lecturer in the Computer Science Department at Rutgers University. Kristian served on the board of the New Jersey Leadership Program, and wasthe Chair of the Asset Forfeiture Working Group for the NJ State Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. He has previously served on the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee for the Federal Communications Commission. Kristian graduated magna cum laude from the Rutgers University School of law, and served on the editorial board of the Rutgers Journal of Law and Public Policy.
Senior Scholar, International Center for Law & Economics
Julian Morris is a Senior Scholar at the International Center for Law & Economics.
Senior Fellow for Law & Economics, International Center for Law & Economics
Dirk Auer is the Senior Fellow for Law & Economics at the International Center for Law & Economics.
Chair, Supreme Court and Appellate Practice, Alexander Dubose Jefferson
Daniel L. Geyser is Chair of the firm’s U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Appellate Practice. He focuses on complex and high-stakes appellate litigation, representing clients in the Supreme Court of the United States and in courts of appeals nationwide. He was named one of Law360’s 2019 “Appellate MVPs,” an honor awarded to only four lawyers in the United States.
Dan is widely regarded as one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court and appellate lawyers. The Legal 500 reports that Dan is “recognized by peers and clients alike as ‘an extraordinary oral advocate and brief writer,’” “stand[ing] out for his sheer brainpower and creative thinking”; clients say “Geyser’s intellect and analysis are peerless”; “‘[h]is legal analysis is brilliant and on point, and his written and oral advocacy is very strong and powerful.’” Chambers USA describes Dan as a “‘superb lawyer with impeccable judgment and a wonderful manner in oral arguments,’” adding he has “‘that rare ability to make clients and legal counsel at ease, even under difficult circumstances. He instills confidence.’”
Dan is among an elite group of lawyers who regularly handles significant cases in the U.S. Supreme Court. He has argued eleven U.S. Supreme Court cases in private practice, more than any other active Texas lawyer. He recently had three cert. petitions granted in a 12-month period (a feat matched by few global firms), and personally handled over 5% of the Court’s merits docket in OT 2018. He has been named to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List,” earned weekly honors as a Law360 “Legal Lion,” achieved national appellate rankings in Chambers & Partners and The Legal 500, and was listed among the “veritable who’s who of the Supreme Court bar” (Empirical SCOTUS). His petitions are regularly featured among the “Petitions of the Week” on SCOTUSblog, and he was named OT 2017’s “top performing” brief-writer among the Court’s repeat players (based on a 2018 empirical study using brief-analyzing software). He is a three-time winner of the National Association of Attorneys General’s Best Brief Award for excellence in brief-writing before the Supreme Court.
Dan routinely matches up against the top litigators in the country. He has convinced the Supreme Court to grant review over the opposition of elite appellate groups at multiple Am Law 20 firms, and his recent wins have come against superstars at Am Law 10 firms and the Solicitor General’s Office. In the past half-decade, Dan is among the top five lawyers nationwide for total Supreme Court arguments in private practice, notching “rare victor[ies]” (SCOTUSblog) and “huge win[s]” (Reuters) in cases that industry experts said could not be won. And Dan is already set to argue another major case in the Supreme Court’s upcoming Term, a closely watched battle involving the Federal Arbitration Act and federal jurisdiction; the case was one of Dan’s two cert. grants in 2021 alone.
Beyond the Supreme Court, Dan handles high-stakes matters in appellate courts nationwide, litigating cases in virtually every major area of federal law (especially securities, bankruptcy, patents, ERISA, and arbitration). For plaintiffs, he has crafted legal strategy in matters generating over a half-billion in recovery. For defendants, he has won appeals in 8- and 9-figure disputes. He has special expertise at the rehearing stage, and has argued before the en banc Ninth Circuit (winning 10-1). In addition to an active federal practice, Dan has handled landmark state-court appeals, including arguing seven times before the Texas Supreme Court.
Before joining ADJ, Dan ran his own award-winning appellate practice; served as the appellate chair of a prominent litigation boutique (also leading that firm to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List” and a Chambers USA national-appellate ranking); and was an appellate partner in one of the nation’s top litigation firms, building its appellate practice while focusing especially on complex patent appeals and bankruptcy cases.
From 2007-2011, Dan served in the Office of the Solicitor General of Texas, where he conducted and supervised appellate litigation for the State. In addition to handling his own docket, his experience in the office included advising other divisions on appellate and trial strategy, revising countless briefs in cases across all subject areas, and extensively preparing other attorneys (in moot courts and otherwise) for oral argument. In his last week on the job, Dan argued before the Texas Supreme Court in Severance v. Patterson, one of the State’s most important cases in recent memory—a constitutional attack on the public’s historic access to open beaches; he had earlier won “a rare motion to rehear the case” (Austin American-Statesman, 2011). The same week, Dan also won a major case in the U.S. Supreme Court, Sossamon v. Texas, involving Congress’s spending power and state sovereignty; Dan wrote the State’s briefs in that case and crafted its core legal theories and appellate strategy. He was also the principal writer of the State’s invitation brief in Rhine v. Deaton, a case marking the very first time the U.S. Supreme Court called for a state solicitor general to file a brief expressing the views of a State.
Dan graduated Phi Beta Kappa, with honors and distinction, from Stanford University, and with honors from Harvard Law School, where he was the Notes Chair of the Harvard Law Review, a best-brief winner and oralist on the championship team of Harvard’s moot-court competition, and a research assistant to Professor Laurence H. Tribe, working on his academic writing and appellate docket. After law school, Dan clerked for the Hon. Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He has received the State Bar of California’s Wiley W. Manuel Award for Pro Bono Legal Services and is a past appointee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Pro Bono Panel.
Chair, Supreme Court and Appellate Practice, Alexander Dubose Jefferson
Daniel L. Geyser is Chair of the firm’s U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Appellate Practice. He focuses on complex and high-stakes appellate litigation, representing clients in the Supreme Court of the United States and in courts of appeals nationwide. He was named one of Law360’s 2019 “Appellate MVPs,” an honor awarded to only four lawyers in the United States.
Dan is widely regarded as one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court and appellate lawyers. The Legal 500 reports that Dan is “recognized by peers and clients alike as ‘an extraordinary oral advocate and brief writer,’” “stand[ing] out for his sheer brainpower and creative thinking”; clients say “Geyser’s intellect and analysis are peerless”; “‘[h]is legal analysis is brilliant and on point, and his written and oral advocacy is very strong and powerful.’” Chambers USA describes Dan as a “‘superb lawyer with impeccable judgment and a wonderful manner in oral arguments,’” adding he has “‘that rare ability to make clients and legal counsel at ease, even under difficult circumstances. He instills confidence.’”
Dan is among an elite group of lawyers who regularly handles significant cases in the U.S. Supreme Court. He has argued eleven U.S. Supreme Court cases in private practice, more than any other active Texas lawyer. He recently had three cert. petitions granted in a 12-month period (a feat matched by few global firms), and personally handled over 5% of the Court’s merits docket in OT 2018. He has been named to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List,” earned weekly honors as a Law360 “Legal Lion,” achieved national appellate rankings in Chambers & Partners and The Legal 500, and was listed among the “veritable who’s who of the Supreme Court bar” (Empirical SCOTUS). His petitions are regularly featured among the “Petitions of the Week” on SCOTUSblog, and he was named OT 2017’s “top performing” brief-writer among the Court’s repeat players (based on a 2018 empirical study using brief-analyzing software). He is a three-time winner of the National Association of Attorneys General’s Best Brief Award for excellence in brief-writing before the Supreme Court.
Dan routinely matches up against the top litigators in the country. He has convinced the Supreme Court to grant review over the opposition of elite appellate groups at multiple Am Law 20 firms, and his recent wins have come against superstars at Am Law 10 firms and the Solicitor General’s Office. In the past half-decade, Dan is among the top five lawyers nationwide for total Supreme Court arguments in private practice, notching “rare victor[ies]” (SCOTUSblog) and “huge win[s]” (Reuters) in cases that industry experts said could not be won. And Dan is already set to argue another major case in the Supreme Court’s upcoming Term, a closely watched battle involving the Federal Arbitration Act and federal jurisdiction; the case was one of Dan’s two cert. grants in 2021 alone.
Beyond the Supreme Court, Dan handles high-stakes matters in appellate courts nationwide, litigating cases in virtually every major area of federal law (especially securities, bankruptcy, patents, ERISA, and arbitration). For plaintiffs, he has crafted legal strategy in matters generating over a half-billion in recovery. For defendants, he has won appeals in 8- and 9-figure disputes. He has special expertise at the rehearing stage, and has argued before the en banc Ninth Circuit (winning 10-1). In addition to an active federal practice, Dan has handled landmark state-court appeals, including arguing seven times before the Texas Supreme Court.
Before joining ADJ, Dan ran his own award-winning appellate practice; served as the appellate chair of a prominent litigation boutique (also leading that firm to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List” and a Chambers USA national-appellate ranking); and was an appellate partner in one of the nation’s top litigation firms, building its appellate practice while focusing especially on complex patent appeals and bankruptcy cases.
From 2007-2011, Dan served in the Office of the Solicitor General of Texas, where he conducted and supervised appellate litigation for the State. In addition to handling his own docket, his experience in the office included advising other divisions on appellate and trial strategy, revising countless briefs in cases across all subject areas, and extensively preparing other attorneys (in moot courts and otherwise) for oral argument. In his last week on the job, Dan argued before the Texas Supreme Court in Severance v. Patterson, one of the State’s most important cases in recent memory—a constitutional attack on the public’s historic access to open beaches; he had earlier won “a rare motion to rehear the case” (Austin American-Statesman, 2011). The same week, Dan also won a major case in the U.S. Supreme Court, Sossamon v. Texas, involving Congress’s spending power and state sovereignty; Dan wrote the State’s briefs in that case and crafted its core legal theories and appellate strategy. He was also the principal writer of the State’s invitation brief in Rhine v. Deaton, a case marking the very first time the U.S. Supreme Court called for a state solicitor general to file a brief expressing the views of a State.
Dan graduated Phi Beta Kappa, with honors and distinction, from Stanford University, and with honors from Harvard Law School, where he was the Notes Chair of the Harvard Law Review, a best-brief winner and oralist on the championship team of Harvard’s moot-court competition, and a research assistant to Professor Laurence H. Tribe, working on his academic writing and appellate docket. After law school, Dan clerked for the Hon. Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He has received the State Bar of California’s Wiley W. Manuel Award for Pro Bono Legal Services and is a past appointee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Pro Bono Panel.
General Counsel, The Center for Individual Rights
Michael E. Rosman is CIR’s General Counsel. He graduated summa cum laude from the University of Rochester in 1981, majoring in economics and political science. He received his J.D. in 1984 from Yale Law School. Mr. Rosman worked as an associate at Rosenman & Colin in New York City from 1984-93.
Mr. Rosman joined CIR in March 1994. Mr. Rosman is the author of several articles, including: “Ambiguity and the First Amendment: Some Thoughts On All-White Advertising,” 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 289 (1993); and “Standing Alone: Standing Under The Fair Housing Act,” 60 Mo. L. Rev. 547 (1995), “Thoughts on Bakke and Its Effect on Race- Conscious Decision-Making,” 2002 U. Chi. Legal F. 45 Book Review of Kent Greenawalt’s Fighting Words, 13 Constitutional Commentary 317 (1996)
Mr. Rosman has litigated throughout the federal court system, and has argued many times in the federal courts of appeals. He also successfully argued on behalf of CIR client Tony Morrison in the United States Supreme Court in the landmark case of United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000).
Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law; Director, Classical Liberal Institute, Civitas Institute University of Texas at Austin
Richard A. Epstein is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law, at New York University, a senior research fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas Austin, and a senior Lecturer, the University of Chicago. He received an LL.D., h.c . from the University of Ghent, 2003 , and an LLD h.c . from the University of Siegen in 2018 and the Bradley Prize in 2011. He has been a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences since 1985. He has edited both the Journal of Legal Studies (1981-1991) and the Journal of Law and Economics (1991-2001). He is also a founder and director of the Classical Liberal Institute at NYU Law School. His most recent book is The Classical Liberal Constitution: The Uncertain Quest for Limited Government (2014). His other books include Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain ( 1985); Bargaining with the State (1993); Simple Rules for a Complex World (1995); Principles for a Free Society: Reconciling Individual Liberty and the Common Good (1998); Skepticism and Freedom: A Modern Theory of Classical Liberalism (2003); Design for Liberty: Private Property, Public Administration and the Rule of Law (2011), and most recently, The Myth of Birthright citizenship—and Beyond (2026). He has taught courses in , administrative law, antitrust, constitutional, contracts, environmental law, land use planning; real property, torts and water law. He has written and spoken extensively on a wide range of topics, and is writes a regular column for Defining Ideas.
Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Aditya Bamzai is a professor of law at the University of Virginia. He teaches administrative law, civil procedure, computer crime and conflicts of law, and he has written about these and related subjects. He has argued cases relating to the separation of powers and national security in the U.S. Supreme Court, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, D.C. Circuit and other federal courts of appeals. From 2019 to 2021, he served as a Member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, a federal agency charged with ensuring that the government’s national security efforts are balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties. Before entering the academy, Bamzai was an attorney-adviser in the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice, and an appellate attorney in both private practice and for the National Security Division of the Department of Justice. Earlier in his career, he was a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States and to Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Partner, Kirkland and Ellis, LLP
John O'Quinn is a Partner in Kirkland's Washington, D.C. office. His practice focuses on litigation, including intellectual property disputes, commercial litigation, regulatory issues arising from or likely to lead to litigation, and other complex litigation matters at both the trial and appellate levels. He has extensive argument experience before both trial and appellate courts, and has argued in most of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, including the D.C. Circuit and the Federal Circuit. Mr. O'Quinn has been to trial multiple times, where he has examined expert and fact witnesses. Representative clients include Apple, Boeing, B. Braun Medical, Charter Communications, C.R. Bard, POET LLC, Siemens, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.
From 2006 to 2009, Mr. O'Quinn served in the United States Department of Justice. As Deputy Associate Attorney General, he was responsible for helping to oversee much of the government's civil litigation and reviewing proposed settlements of multi-million dollar civil cases brought by or against the government. As the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Federal Programs Branch of the Civil Division, Mr. O'Quinn supervised over 100 attorneys charged with defending the constitutionality of federal statutes and regulations, representing the diplomatic and national security interests of the United States in court, and conducting significant Title VII, personnel, social security, Medicare and Medicaid-related litigation. Mr. O'Quinn worked with counsel from virtually every federal agency on complex civil litigation matters and personally directed significant cases defending the government's interests, arguing more than 20 cases in federal court. In February of 2009, Mr. O'Quinn was awarded the Office of the Secretary of Defense Medal for Exceptional Public Service for his leadership in defending the Department of Defense in lawsuits challenging the detention and trial of enemy combatants captured abroad by United States Armed Forces.
Mr. O'Quinn was previously an associate with Kirkland from 2003 to 2006. While on leave from the Firm, he served as special counsel to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary for the nomination of Chief Justice Roberts. Prior to joining the Firm, Mr. O'Quinn was a law clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court and Judge David Sentelle of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
While at Kirkland, Mr. O'Quinn has also provided legal counseling and representation for individuals and organizations on a pro bono basis, including arguing a habeas petition on behalf of a defendant convicted of capital murder, and submitting FOIA requests on behalf of a civil rights organization.
Chair, Supreme Court and Appellate Practice, Alexander Dubose Jefferson
Daniel L. Geyser is Chair of the firm’s U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Appellate Practice. He focuses on complex and high-stakes appellate litigation, representing clients in the Supreme Court of the United States and in courts of appeals nationwide. He was named one of Law360’s 2019 “Appellate MVPs,” an honor awarded to only four lawyers in the United States.
Dan is widely regarded as one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court and appellate lawyers. The Legal 500 reports that Dan is “recognized by peers and clients alike as ‘an extraordinary oral advocate and brief writer,’” “stand[ing] out for his sheer brainpower and creative thinking”; clients say “Geyser’s intellect and analysis are peerless”; “‘[h]is legal analysis is brilliant and on point, and his written and oral advocacy is very strong and powerful.’” Chambers USA describes Dan as a “‘superb lawyer with impeccable judgment and a wonderful manner in oral arguments,’” adding he has “‘that rare ability to make clients and legal counsel at ease, even under difficult circumstances. He instills confidence.’”
Dan is among an elite group of lawyers who regularly handles significant cases in the U.S. Supreme Court. He has argued eleven U.S. Supreme Court cases in private practice, more than any other active Texas lawyer. He recently had three cert. petitions granted in a 12-month period (a feat matched by few global firms), and personally handled over 5% of the Court’s merits docket in OT 2018. He has been named to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List,” earned weekly honors as a Law360 “Legal Lion,” achieved national appellate rankings in Chambers & Partners and The Legal 500, and was listed among the “veritable who’s who of the Supreme Court bar” (Empirical SCOTUS). His petitions are regularly featured among the “Petitions of the Week” on SCOTUSblog, and he was named OT 2017’s “top performing” brief-writer among the Court’s repeat players (based on a 2018 empirical study using brief-analyzing software). He is a three-time winner of the National Association of Attorneys General’s Best Brief Award for excellence in brief-writing before the Supreme Court.
Dan routinely matches up against the top litigators in the country. He has convinced the Supreme Court to grant review over the opposition of elite appellate groups at multiple Am Law 20 firms, and his recent wins have come against superstars at Am Law 10 firms and the Solicitor General’s Office. In the past half-decade, Dan is among the top five lawyers nationwide for total Supreme Court arguments in private practice, notching “rare victor[ies]” (SCOTUSblog) and “huge win[s]” (Reuters) in cases that industry experts said could not be won. And Dan is already set to argue another major case in the Supreme Court’s upcoming Term, a closely watched battle involving the Federal Arbitration Act and federal jurisdiction; the case was one of Dan’s two cert. grants in 2021 alone.
Beyond the Supreme Court, Dan handles high-stakes matters in appellate courts nationwide, litigating cases in virtually every major area of federal law (especially securities, bankruptcy, patents, ERISA, and arbitration). For plaintiffs, he has crafted legal strategy in matters generating over a half-billion in recovery. For defendants, he has won appeals in 8- and 9-figure disputes. He has special expertise at the rehearing stage, and has argued before the en banc Ninth Circuit (winning 10-1). In addition to an active federal practice, Dan has handled landmark state-court appeals, including arguing seven times before the Texas Supreme Court.
Before joining ADJ, Dan ran his own award-winning appellate practice; served as the appellate chair of a prominent litigation boutique (also leading that firm to the National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List” and a Chambers USA national-appellate ranking); and was an appellate partner in one of the nation’s top litigation firms, building its appellate practice while focusing especially on complex patent appeals and bankruptcy cases.
From 2007-2011, Dan served in the Office of the Solicitor General of Texas, where he conducted and supervised appellate litigation for the State. In addition to handling his own docket, his experience in the office included advising other divisions on appellate and trial strategy, revising countless briefs in cases across all subject areas, and extensively preparing other attorneys (in moot courts and otherwise) for oral argument. In his last week on the job, Dan argued before the Texas Supreme Court in Severance v. Patterson, one of the State’s most important cases in recent memory—a constitutional attack on the public’s historic access to open beaches; he had earlier won “a rare motion to rehear the case” (Austin American-Statesman, 2011). The same week, Dan also won a major case in the U.S. Supreme Court, Sossamon v. Texas, involving Congress’s spending power and state sovereignty; Dan wrote the State’s briefs in that case and crafted its core legal theories and appellate strategy. He was also the principal writer of the State’s invitation brief in Rhine v. Deaton, a case marking the very first time the U.S. Supreme Court called for a state solicitor general to file a brief expressing the views of a State.
Dan graduated Phi Beta Kappa, with honors and distinction, from Stanford University, and with honors from Harvard Law School, where he was the Notes Chair of the Harvard Law Review, a best-brief winner and oralist on the championship team of Harvard’s moot-court competition, and a research assistant to Professor Laurence H. Tribe, working on his academic writing and appellate docket. After law school, Dan clerked for the Hon. Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He has received the State Bar of California’s Wiley W. Manuel Award for Pro Bono Legal Services and is a past appointee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Pro Bono Panel.
Topics
Oral Arguments in Arthrex
On March 1, 2021, the Supreme Court heard oral argument on the question of when...
Topics
U.S. v. Arthrex: The Court Should Find PTAB's Structure Unconstitutional
Since 2011, federal law has permitted those seeking to challenge the validity of patents...
Appointments Clause Back in the Supreme Court: Patent Office Judges as Principal or Inferior Officers
Aditya Bamzai, John C. O'Quinn
Eleven months ago the Federal Circuit held that the Administrative Patent Judges who serve on...
Appointments Clause Back in the Supreme Court: Patent Office Judges as Principal or Inferior Officers
Federalism and Separation of Powers Practice Group Teleforum
TeleforumThe Deterioration of Appropriate Remedies in Patent Disputes
Geoffrey A. Manne, Kristian Stout, Julian Morris, Dirk Auer
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Courthouse Steps Decision Teleforum: Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP
Daniel L. Geyser
In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP (Supreme Court, April 20, 2020), the Supreme Court held that...
Courthouse Steps Decision Teleforum: Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP
TeleforumThryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Daniel L. Geyser
On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court released its decision in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies,...
Is It Time to Revisit the Constitutionality of Unauthorized Practice of Law Rules?
Michael E. Rosman
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
The Supreme Court Tackles Patent Reform: Inter Partes Review Under the AIA Undermines the Structural Protections Offered by Article III Courts
Richard A. Epstein
Note from the Editor: This article criticizes Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinion in Oil States. It...