Winston & Strawn

Site Search

Professionals (832)
Capabilities (80)
Experience (92)
Insights & News (2,954)
Other Results (57)

Professionals 832 results

Craig V. Rasile

Partner

+1 305-910-0760

vCard

Partner

David Enzminger

Partner

+1 213-615-1780

vCard

Partner

Glenn S. Shubb

Managing Director

Los Angeles

+1 213-615-1772

vCard

Managing Director

Los Angeles

View All Professionals

Capabilities 80 results

Industry

Technology, Media & Telecommunications

Practice Area

Labor & Employment

Our Labor & Employment Practice is one of the largest and most experienced practices among the country’s multi-disciplined law firms. Our attorneys represent global employers of all types and sizes—ranging from the Fortune 100 to privately held startups—often serving as national, regional, or preferred counsel to many of these major employers....Read more

Industry

Sports

Winston has one of the world’s premier sports law practices. Our work has included some of the most famous legal matters in sports history—including Alston v. NCAA, the case that culminated in a 9–0 Supreme Court victory for the college players against the NCAA; the US$2.15B Los Angeles Dodgers acquisition; McNeil v. the NFL, the landmark antitrust jury trial that led to the establishment of free agency in the NFL; the multi-billion-dollar construction and permanent financings for SoFi Stadium; and Morgan v. USSF, the case that led to a historic equal pay settlement for the players on the Women’s National Team. Our work is transforming this global, multibillion-dollar industry....Read more

Experience 92 results

Experience

September 8, 2025

Winston Wins Ninth Circuit Reversal and Class Certification in Swimmers’ Antitrust Case, Securing a Global-Impact Settlement with World Aquatics

Winston represents a class of professional swimmers alleging World Aquatics (WA) violated antitrust laws by blocking their participation in the competing International Swimming League. After WA won summary judgment, Winston successfully appealed, arguing the court applied improper antitrust standards and wrongly denied certification of a damages class. In September 2024, the Ninth Circuit reversed both rulings, reviving all claims and issuing a landmark ruling on the possible application of the per se rule or quick look review to sports-associations rules. Am Law awarded Winston “Litigator of the Week” Runner-Up recognition for the win. In November 2024, the Ninth Circuit denied rehearing. In April 2025, the district court certified a damages class....Read more

Experience

June 25, 2025

Winston Secures Federal Circuit Affirmance of 101 Victory for Polycom

Winston secured an appellate victory for Polycom (now part of HP) when the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment on the pleadings of patent-ineligibility in a lawsuit brought by directPacket Research, Inc. Working closely with HP, Winston argued that all claims of the asserted patent were directed to the abstract idea of translation via an intermediate protocol, with no inventive concept. The Northern District of California agreed, and the Federal Circuit unanimously affirmed, adopting Winston’s arguments. Eimeric Reig argued the appeal, working with HP and the Winston team, including Kathi Vidal, Kelly Hunsaker, Sam Lerner, Matt McCullough, and David Dalke....Read more

Experience

May 15, 2025

Winston Secures Federal Circuit Victory for Snap Axing Image-Presentation Patents on the Pleadings

Ask Sydney sued Snap along with four large tech companies in the Western District of Texas, Waco Division, asserting infringement of two related patents on methods of generating and presenting images to a user to determine the user’s interest. Working closely with Snap, Winston successfully moved to transfer the case to the Central District of California, then moved for judgment on the pleadings of patent-ineligibility under § 101 of the Patent Act. Following a hearing with multiple rounds of argument, the district court granted the motion, adopting Winston’s arguments that distinguished findings by the patent examiner during prosecution and by the Western District of Texas, which had denied § 101 motions brought by two other defendants. Ask Sydney appealed, but the Federal Circuit summarily affirmed three days after oral argument, handing Snap a decisive win invalidating all claims of both asserted patents. Eimeric Reig led the strategy and argued the appeal and motion hearing, working with Kathi Vidal and Kelly Hunsaker....Read more

View All Experience

Insights & News 2,954 results

Recognitions

October 31, 2025

1 Min Read

Winston & Strawn Ranked in 2025 Chambers Brazil: Transactional Guide

Winston & Strawn has been recognized in the 2025 edition of Chambers Brazil: Transactional Guide. Chambers Brazil ranks and reviews the top law firms and lawyers in Brazil based on in-depth research and client feedback across key practice areas and industry sectors. The firm was ranked for its strength in the following international firm practice areas:...Read more

Global Trade & Foreign Policy Insights

October 31, 2025

4 Min Read

EU Publishes 19th Sanctions Packages Against Russia

As Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine continues, the European Union (EU) has maintained its commitment to increasing economic and legal pressure on Russia. In 2025, the EU adopted its 16th, 17th, 18th, and now 19th sanctions packages, each introducing new measures and expanding existing restrictions.

Winston’s Environmental Law Update

October 30, 2025

5 Min Read

E15 Gasoline: Legal Landscape and Recent Legislative Updates

The EPA establishes a national standard for gasoline volatility (Reid vapor pressure, or RVP) via section 211(h) of the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds.

View All Insights & News

Other Results 57 results

Site Content

Associate Salary Disclosures

Law Glossary

What Exclusivity Periods Are Associated with Biosimilars?

An applicant may not submit an aBLA until four years after the reference product is licensed by the FDA. (See BPCIA § 351(k).) Further, any biosimilar licenses “may not be made effective” until 12 years after the reference product was licensed. (See BPCIA § 351(l).)...Read more

Site Content

What Is the California Unfair Competition Law?

California Unfair Competition Law...Read more