Site Search
Professionals 541 results
Capabilities 85 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 53 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
|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.
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.
Insights & News 3,908 results
Sponsorship
|October 22, 2025
Winston & Strawn Sponsors the 2025 Eastern District of Texas Bench Bar Conference
Winston & Strawn is a proud sponsor of the 2025 Eastern District of Texas Bench Bar Conference, one of the nation’s top annual bench bar conferences. The conference brings together judges, lawyers, topic speakers, guests, and other participants from across the world to discuss a broad range of cutting-edge legal topics.
Sponsorship
|October 15, 2025
Winston & Strawn Sponsors ChIPs 2025 Global Summit
Winston & Strawn is a proud sponsor of the 2025 ChIPs Global Summit, which brings together women from all over the world working in technology, policy, private practice, corporations, government, academia, and beyond. Each year, the summit aims to advance innovation through diversity of thought and connect women through engagement opportunities.
Client Alert
|October 3, 2025
|4 Min Read
Debanking Developments: New Regulatory Scrutiny Coming After Trump Executive Order
In this alert, Winston’s Financial Services Industry Group examines the latest developments in regulatory scrutiny of “debanking,” with a particular focus on recent actions following a Trump administration executive order.
Other Results 97 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).