Site Search
Professionals 565 results
Capabilities 87 results
Practice Area
Our Patent Litigation Practice is one of the country’s most active and highly regarded. Our seasoned patent litigators bring extensive courtroom experience to every matter we handle. According to Lex Machina, we are among the top three national patent defense firms in the country for number of appearances and cases filed, and we also were the top national defense firm for number of patent trials in the last five years (2018–2022).
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 59 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 3,923 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.
Investigations, Enforcement, & Compliance Alerts
|January 15, 2026
|2 Min Read
In a move that would mark a significant departure from longstanding practice separating Department of Justice operations from direct White House control, the White House announced on January 8, 2026, a plan to create and directly supervise a new Department of Justice (DOJ) division for national fraud enforcement. The division would be led by a Senate-confirmed assistant attorney general (AAG). According to Vice President Vance, the new AAG will have “nationwide jurisdiction over the issue of fraud” and will be supervised by President Trump and Vice President Vance, rather than by DOJ leadership.
Other Results 99 results
Law Glossary
What Are the Patent Litigation Differences Between the BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman Act?
There are fundamental differences between the abbreviated approval processes to obtain FDA approval for biosimilars and generic drugs as those processes relate to patent litigation.
Law Glossary
Colloquially referred to as the “patent dance,” the BPCIA provides a framework that includes certain steps and a schedule during which the applicant and reference product sponsor exchange confidential information disclosed in the aBLA. During the patent dance, the applicant and sponsor identify the patents that could be litigated in the future during two potential phases of litigation. In the first phase, the sponsor can allege infringement of a subset of the patents identified during the patent dance. The second phase begins after the sponsor receives the Notice of Commercial Marketing from the applicant. During this second phase, the sponsor can assert any remaining patents that were not asserted in the first phase.
Law Glossary
What Is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board?
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is a tribunal within U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The PTAB oversees trial proceedings, namely: inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), covered business method (CBM) review, and derivation proceedings. The Board also hears appeals from adverse patentability decisions by patent examiners in original applications, reissues, and reexaminations. And, while phasing out since the passage of the America Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, the PTAB is also responsible for deciding interferences. The PTAB was previously referred to as the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and was renamed by the AIA.