Leah Pransky
Associate

lpransky@keker.com
Tel. (415) 676-2296

Education

Stanford Law School, J.D. 2014

Wesleyan University, B.A., 2006

Leah Pransky

Ms. Pransky represents clients in a range of complex civil and criminal matters. She has tackled difficult cases involving high-stakes trade secret and patent disputes, both in trial courts and before the PTAB. She has also handled sensitive employment problems, securities issues and corporate criminal investigations. Ms. Pransky has an active pro bono immigration practice.

Before joining Keker, Van Nest & Peters, Ms. Pransky gained valuable experience by participating in Stanford Law School’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic and Moot Court competition. In addition, Ms. Pransky took advantage of Stanford’s cross-disciplinary curriculum, taking numerous classes in the Design School.

Prior to law school, Ms. Pransky worked as a product and project manager for a number of software companies in Los Angeles, New York City, and San Francisco.

Cases of Note

SanDisk Corp. v. SK Hynix Inc.: We represented SanDisk in a massive trade secret misappropriation and corporate espionage case. SanDisk, a global leader in flash memory storage solutions, sued competitor SK Hynix for misappropriating approximately ten gigabytes of highly confidential trade secret information and using that information over the course of six years to revamp Hynix’s technology and unfairly compete with SanDisk. We obtained a sweeping preliminary injunction that barred Hynix from any further use or disclosure of stolen SanDisk information, and fought back efforts to dismiss the case, to send it to arbitration, to transfer it overseas, and to remove it from the court that granted the preliminary injunction. Following a series of courtroom victories for our client, the parties reached a confidential settlement and entered into a product supply agreement.

United States v. Biotech Corporation: The government was attempting to intimidate our client by pursuing parallel criminal and civil False Claims Act claims involving the marketing of a late-stage cancer drug. After we intervened, we received a letter from the U.S. Attorney declining to prosecute, greatly reducing our client’s potential exposure. We continue to defend our client from the civil case.

Joanne Hoeper v. Dennis Herrera; City and County of San Francisco: We are defending the city and county of San Francisco from a wrongful termination/retaliation claim brought by former chief trial deputy Joanne Hoeper. The case was originally filed against the City Attorney as well, but we successfully moved for his dismissal. Hoeper claims to be a whistle-blower, a claim which the City disputes and which is irrelevant to her dismissal.

Immigration Matter: We represent a family of Guatemalan refugees who have suffered and fled severe domestic and family violence. We have successfully secured asylum for two of the family members, and are currently preparing our third client for immigration-court proceedings.

Developed by Tenrec