Site Search
Professionals 642 results
Capabilities 89 results
Practice Area
Product Liability & Mass Torts
Major multinational companies trust Winston to defend their products and reputations in high-profile, high-stakes product liability and mass tort claims. Our Product Liability & Mass Torts Practice is one of the industry’s most seasoned, with a deep bench of experienced lawyers and a unique combination of extensive trial experience and expansive technical knowledge.
Industry
Energy Industry Litigation & Investigations
With our reputation as a trial lawyers’ firm serving as our foundation, we advocate for a variety of power producers, oil and gas companies, and oilfield services providers in high-stakes litigation throughout U.S. district and appellate courts. We also handle sensitive investigations, contentious regulatory and enforcement issues, and arbitration. Our bench is stacked with innovative legal and commercial problem solvers, many of whom came to Winston from in-house positions, amplifying their appreciation for C-suite complexities. By combining our knowledge of the energy industry with first-rate trial skills, and the experience our practitioners have gained from learning our clients’ businesses, we are positioned to obtain the best result for our clients efficiently—whether in the courtroom or a negotiated solution.
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 170 results
Experience
|January 27, 2026
Winston & Strawn secured a decisive victory for PayPal in an intellectual property dispute brought by Irish non-practicing entity Internet Payment Patents LTD (IPPL). Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen of the Northern District of California entered final judgment in PayPal’s favor, finding all asserted patent claims ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and granting PayPal’s motion to dismiss without leave to amend.
Experience
|January 22, 2026
Advised SQM on US$600M offering of subordinated capital notes due 2056 (Hybrid Bond Offering)
Winston & Strawn LLP advised longstanding client Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (“SQM”) (NYSE: SQM) on its US$600 million offering of subordinated capital notes. The notes were offered in the United States pursuant to Rule 144A and outside the United States pursuant to Regulation S.The subordinated capital notes are due in 2056 and constitute SQM’s first international hybrid bond issuance, structured to be consistent with SQM’s recent UF 10 million (approximately US$ 430 million) Series S hybrid-subordinated bond issuance in the Chilean securities market. The notes bear an initial annual interest rate of 5.625% and are subject to reset on April 22, 2031 (the “First Reset Date”), and on every fifth anniversary thereafter, based on a spread over the 5-year U.S. Treasury bond rate, with interest rate step-ups on the fifth and twentieth anniversaries of the First Reset Date. The transaction closed on January 22, 2026.BofA Securities, Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Santander US Capital Markets LLC, and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc. acted as initial purchasers of the notes.Link Capital Partners was financial advisor to SQM.SQM is a global company with a leading position in the lithium, iodine, and potassium nitrate markets. It develops and produces a diverse range of products for industries essential to human progress, including health, nutrition, renewable energy, and technology, driven by innovation and technological development.The Winston & Strawn team advising on the transaction included corporate partner Sey-Hyo Lee (New York) and foreign legal advisor Bruno M. Fiorino (New York). Partner Katherine Erbeznik (New York) advised on tax matters.
Experience
|January 21, 2026
Winston Represents Century Park Capital Partners In Its Exit of MCCi
Winston represented Century Park Capital Partners and its portfolio company MCCi, LLC, in connection with an investment by Incline Equity Partners in MCCi. MCCi is a provider of enterprise content management and workflow automation solutions to public sector clients with a comprehensive suite of products that enable state and local governments to solve manual workflow challenges and drive operational efficiency throughout their organizations. Under Century Park's stewardship, MCCi strengthened its position as a leader in business process automation while maintaining its culture of exceptional customer service.
Insights & News 4,686 results
Recognitions
|February 19, 2026
|Less Than 1 Min Read
Winston Ranked Among the Top Ten Firms for Patent Litigation by Patexia
Winston & Strawn was recognized among the top ten law firms for patent litigation in Patexia’s 2026 Patent Litigation Report. The ranking is based on both activity and performance.
Global Trade & Foreign Policy Insights
|February 19, 2026
|9 Min Read
United States Issues Significant New Sanctions Relief for Venezuela’s Oil & Gas Sector
Although Venezuela remains subject to sanctions targeting the Government of Venezuela (GoV) and entities in which it holds a 50% or greater ownership interest, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has issued a series of General Licenses (GLs) representing the broadest easing of Venezuela-related sanctions in years.
In the Media
|February 17, 2026
|2 Min Read
Scott Naidech Discusses CV Transaction Risks with Private Equity Law Report
Winston & Strawn partner Scott Naidech was quoted in a Private Equity Law Report article discussing key takeaways for sponsors to consider as they undertake continuation vehicle (CV) transactions following a complaint filed in Delaware Court of Chancery that highlights the potential risks when a fund sponsor seeks to push through a CV transaction over the objection of existing investors.
Other Results 141 results
Law Glossary
What Are Interchangeable Biological Products?
A biological product is interchangeable if it is biosimilar to the reference product and is expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient. A biosimilar product that is deemed to be interchangeable by the FDA means the biosimilar product can be substituted for the reference product by a pharmacist without consulting the prescriber. The specific requirements for substitution vary by state.
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
In the product liability context, general causation is the legal and scientific determination of whether the product in question has the inherent capability to cause the alleged injury under certain circumstances. Establishment of general causation is a critical aspect of a plaintiff’s case, and typically requires scientific evidence, such as epidemiology or toxicology, and expert testimony to establish a causal connection between the product’s design, manufacturing, or warnings and the injury or injuries at issue. As contrasted to specific causation, the focus in a general causation inquiry is on whether the product or exposure, as a general matter, can cause the type of injury claimed by the plaintiff. A general causation inquiry does not assess any facts unique to a particular plaintiff.