Site Search
Professionals 567 results
Capabilities 87 results
Practice Area
The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) is an increasingly popular venue for patent infringement litigation. More and more companies are seeking to halt importations of infringing products into the United States by turning to the ITC for expedited relief. Section 337 investigations conducted by the ITC provide complainants with a “fast track” to remedy IP matters that typically go to trial within 10 months. Since many Section 337 cases go to trial, selecting an ITC litigation team with a command of the technology, patent law, and specialized procedural practice is extremely important. We have handled more than 100 cases before the ITC.
Practice Area
For decades, Winston has represented a broad array of clients in the insurance industry, including some of the world’s largest and best-known insurers. Our prowess in and understanding of the insurance industry encompasses not only its products, practices, and services, but also the increasing challenges posed by a world increasingly characterized by a fast-evolving technological landscape as well as financial, political, and environmental instability. Accordingly, Winston’s lawyers are among the most sought-after in the industry—not only by companies currently facing high-stakes litigations and investigations, but by those looking to take preventive action now in order to mitigate and manage their risk in the future.
Practice Area
Brands across key sectors turn to Winston litigators to defend their reputations in advertising class actions, competitor disputes, and investigations. With litigators based in the U.S.’s busiest jurisdictions—including courts in California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and Texas—we have deep experience and prowess in handling some of the most high-profile and business-essential advertising cases in recent history. These disputes have involved false advertising; unfair competition, unfair business practices, and unjust enrichment; copyright, trade name, and service mark infringement; consumer-protection claims; and violations of the Lanham Act.
Experience 54 results
Experience
|December 11, 2025
Winston Takes the Checkered Flag After “Massive Win” Settlement
Winston squared off in the W.D.N.C. against lawyers for NASCAR in an antitrust lawsuit brought on behalf of racing teams Front Row Motorsports Inc. and 23X1 Racing LLC—the team co-owned by Michael Jordan and driver Denny Hamlin—alleging monopolization of the market for premier stock car racing teams. On December 11, 2025, nine days into trial and the morning after the plaintiffs rested their case, the parties jointly announced a settlement. Jeffrey Kessler, Jeanifer Parsigian, and Danielle Williams were recognized by American Lawyer with its top “Litigator of the Week” honors on December 19, 2025, for this historic settlement.
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
|July 30, 2025
Represent Norman W. Fries, Inc. d/b/a Claxton Poultry Farms in a series of 15+ antitrust class actions consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois and brought by plaintiffs who allege that Claxton and the nation’s other largest poultry producers conspired to fix the price of broiler chickens in a scheme from 2008 to 2016 that raised the price for broiler chickens by artificially reducing supply.
Insights & News 3,867 results
Sponsorship
|January 22, 2026
Winston Sponsors the 14th ITA-IEL-ICC Joint Conference on International Energy Arbitration
Winston is proud to sponsor the 14th ITA-IEL-ICC Joint Conference on International Energy Arbitration.
Recognitions
|January 9, 2026
|Less Than 1 Min Read
Winston Recognized in World Intellectual Property Review’s 2025 Trademark Rankings
Winston was recognized in World Intellectual Property Review's (WIPR) USA Trademark Rankings 2025. The rankings are “designed to identify the foremost legal talent dedicated to brand protection across the US.”
Recognitions
|January 9, 2026
|1 Min Read
Winston & Strawn’s Antitrust/Competition Practice Honored in 2026 GCR 100
Global Competition Review has recognized Winston & Strawn’s Antitrust/Competition Practice as “highly recommended” in New York, Illinois, and California in the 2026 GCR 100. For over two decades, GCR 100 has provided a comprehensive list of the world’s best competition practices based on a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the law firms and economic consultancies doing the most important antitrust work around the world.
Other Results 95 results
Law Glossary
What Is Advertising Litigation?
Advertising litigation is defined as the legal area that covers false or deceptive advertising cases. Lawsuits may be brought by government agencies or corporate competitors based on the Lanham Act—a law that specifically deals with false advertising. The Act outlines how an advertisement can be deemed false. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the ability to file lawsuits to halt deceptive advertising claims. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration may also pursue advertising litigation against violators of government regulations. Companies may be called on to substantiate their advertising claims, whether these are made in print or online.
Site Content
What Is the Domestic Industry Requirement?
The domestic industry requirement for Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) mandates that a complainant asserting patent infringement at the ITC, or complainant’s licensee, has made in the United States significant investments in plant and equipment, significant investments in labor or capital, or substantial investments in engineering, research and development, or licensing. The investments must further be directed to articles that practice a valid claim of the asserted patent. The investment component of the requirement is referred to as the “economic prong,” while the requirement that the article practices the asserted patent is referred to as the “technical prong.” The domestic industry requirement is codified in 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(2)-(3).