Site Search
Professionals 107 results
Capabilities 33 results
Practice Area
Environmental Litigation & Enforcement
With today’s rapidly evolving rules of engagement, paired with the often contentious nature of environmental disputes, clients rely on Winston for our practical experience and substantive knowledge of the broad-ranging issues involved in environmental litigation, enforcement, and investigations.
Practice Area
Privacy: Regulated Personal Information (RPI)
Winston’s Regulated Personal Information (RPI) Practice offers seamlessly integrated counseling and litigation services to companies looking for practical and solution-oriented assistance navigating the compliance, regulatory, and private class action enforcement risks presented by the emerging patchwork of complex (and often conflicting) privacy laws in the United States and beyond.
Practice Area
Trade Secrets, Non Competes & Restrictive Covenants
In today’s fast-paced, global marketplace, the theft of trade secrets and other confidential information is an all-too-common risk. Our team helps clients navigate this complex landscape with strategies that are both comprehensive and scalable—designed to prevent issues before they arise and respond effectively when they do.
Experience 18 results
Experience
|September 8, 2025
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.
Experience
|June 8, 2025
Secured, with co-counsel, final approval of an historic settlement of over US$2.75B in back-damages for current and former college-athletes and a new revenue-sharing model allowing schools to share future earnings with athletes. This decade-long effort across four different lawsuits redefines the economics of college sports, affirming athlete rights and fair compensation. Following a 9-0 Supreme Court victory in Alston v. NCAA, the team filed three antitrust class actions, resulting in a groundbreaking settlement that creates a revenue-sharing system projected to generate at least US$20B in new, previously prohibited payments and benefits to Division I college athletes over the next decade. The settlement was recognized in Am Law‘s Litigator of the Week column.
Experience
|April 30, 2025
Rapid Ruling: Fifth Circuit Affirms Winston Win on Summary Judgment the Day After Oral Argument
Winston recently secured a total victory for our clients, KVP Energy Services, LLC and other affiliated defendants, at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Plaintiff BHI Energy I Power Services LLC filed suit in the U.S. Northern District of Texas in September 2022, alleging US$150M in damages in connection with causes of action for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and various other business torts and statutory violations. Winston scored an important early win in January 2023 by defeating BHI Energy’s motion for preliminary injunction. After a year of extensive discovery, Winston moved for full summary judgment on behalf of all defendants. In a strongly worded opinion, the district court granted Winston’s summary judgment motion and dismissed the entirety of BHI’s lawsuit.
Insights & News 691 results
Recognitions
|November 14, 2025
|1 Min Read
Winston Pro Bono Team Recognized in Litigator of the Week Column by The Am Law Litigation Daily
A Winston & Strawn pro bono team led by Aldo Badini and Michelle Tuma was featured in the Litigator of the Week column by The Am Law Litigation Daily on November 14, 2025.
Pro Bono In Action
|November 12, 2025
|2 Min Read
Winston Wins $112 Million Verdict for Immigrants Unlawfully Held by Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office
Following eight years of hard-fought litigation, including a 5-day trial, a jury awarded $112 million in damages to a certified class of 670+ immigrants who were unlawfully detained by the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office (the County) based solely on detainers issued by ICE without showing probable cause.
Recognitions
|November 12, 2025
|2 Min Read
Winston Lawyers Named as 2025 Law360 MVPs
Winston partners Jeffrey Kessler and Tom Melsheimer merited inclusion on Law360’s 2025 MVPs list. As described by Law360, this year’s winners “have distinguished themselves from their peers by securing hard-earned successes in high-stakes litigation, complex global matters and record-breaking deals.”
Other Results 18 results
Site Content
What Is a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO)?
A temporary restraining order (TRO) is a legal document issued by a judge before trial that forces or prevents an action for a specified time frame. During court cases that involve trademark infringement or the use of a trade secret, a TRO can halt patent, copyright, or trademark infringement in the short term. It can offer relief in various situations, such as to prevent the sharing of a business secret or an unfair competition practice, until a court hearing on a preliminary injunction can be held. A TRO petition is an emergency request for a state or federal court to take immediate action based on submitted evidence.
Site Content
The United States Patent and Trademark Office refers to a trade secret as a type of intellectual property. This definition of trade secret is in reference to the business ownership of a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that provides a competitive edge. As a member of the World Trade Organization, the U.S. government has a responsibility to protect trade secrets. The passage of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) also increased trade secret protection. Under the DTSA, an individual or organization may be found liable in a civil case for the misappropriation of trade secrets.
Site Content
The Illinois Biometric Invasion of Privacy Act (BIPA), enacted in 2008, grants Illinois consumers the right to their own biometric data, such as fingerprints, retina or iris information, voiceprints, and DNA. Under the BIPA, private companies are prohibited from collecting biometric information unless (1) the person consents in writing and (2) the companies inform the person in writing of what data is being collected, for what purpose, and for how long. Besides the notice and consent requirement, the law also bans any company from selling or otherwise profiting from consumers’ biometrics.