Matan Shacham defends businesses, executives, and professionals in high-stakes, complex civil litigation. He has tried nine cases to verdict in federal and state courts, and before arbitrators, across the country. He has also litigated appeals before the California Court of Appeal, the Ninth Circuit, the First Circuit, and the Federal Circuit.
Mr. Shacham’s practice extends across a wide range of subject areas. He has deep experience in the developing fields of AI law and internet law, and he has advised and defended leading AI labs and social media companies in matters involving cutting-edge issues in those fields. He has represented some of the country’s top technology companies in high-stakes antitrust, patent, and trade secret cases. He has represented executives in high-profile securities cases and other complicated business disputes. He has also defended attorneys—from international Am Law 100 firms, regional boutiques, and plaintiff-side firms—in major legal malpractice lawsuits.
In 2021, Mr. Shacham was named a Law360 Rising Star, including for his work defending Qualcomm in a month-long antitrust trial and a related consumer class-action.
Mr. Shacham has an active pro bono practice, focusing on civil rights issues. He serves on the Executive Committee for the Bar Association of San Francisco’s Intellectual Property Section, and he previously served as Chair of the Civil Rights Committee for the Anti-Defamation League’s Central-Pacific Region.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Shacham clerked for the Hon. Sandra L. Lynch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He earned his J.D., cum laude, from Harvard Law School, where he served as Executive Editor of the Harvard Law Review.
Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm
We represent Qualcomm in a case brought by the FTC alleging that Qualcomm had failed to license its standard-essential patents at fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) royalty rates and that Qualcomm had engaged in exclusionary conduct that increased its competitors’ costs and reduced their ability and incentive to innovate. Following a month-long bench trial, the district court issued an injunction that would have forced Qualcomm to license rival chip suppliers and renegotiate its existing licenses with cellphone makers. In August of 2020 the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment and vacated the injunction.
In Re: Qualcomm Antitrust Litigation
We represent Qualcomm with respect to claims brought by a putative class of 250 million cellphone users alleging that Qualcomm inflated mobile device prices through its standard-essential patent licensing practices. We successfully overturned a nationwide class certification order before the Ninth Circuit and eliminated much of the case on a subsequent motion to dismiss.
Real Estate Developer v. Law Firm et al.
We represented a law firm and individual attorneys in a highly contentious and complicated case brought by a developer alleging legal malpractice claims against our clients, along with numerous claims against a large group of other individuals and companies involved in a real estate joint venture. We executed an aggressive defense strategy, using early discovery and motion practice, to quickly extricate our clients from the dispute. We secured dismissal for waiver of costs for all the individual attorneys and a favorable early settlement for the law firm.
Ericsson v. D-Link et al
We led an industry-wide joint defense group through a 7-day jury trial in the Eastern District of Texas. Ericsson asserted 5 patents that it claimed read on the 802.11 wifi standard, and it sued a large number of companies with products that used wifi, including laptop and wireless router companies. We won a non-infringement verdict on two of the patents in suit and limited the damages award for the remaining three patents. On appeal to the Federal Circuit, we were able to further narrow the verdict. The remaining patents were ultimately defeated on IPR.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Former Chief Executive Officer
We defended the former CEO of Fannie Mae in an SEC action filed in the Southern District of New York related to Fannie Mae’s disclosures regarding its exposure to “subprime” and “Alt-A” residential mortgages. We secured a favorable settlement for our client shortly before trial.
Diabetes Research Restitution, LLC v. Ronald Katz et al.
We secured summary judgment for our client, the former Chairman of a biotech start-up company that tried to develop and commercialize an islet-cell suspension treatment for people with insulin-dependent diabetes. The lawsuit was brought by the company’s former CEO and certain shareholders against the company’s officers, directors, and creditors and sought over $100 million in damages.
Scarborough et al. v. Facebook, Inc.
We defended Facebook against a group of plaintiffs seeking to establish a new right under the California constitution’s free speech clause to force companies operating social media platforms to publish anti-vaccine posts. In November 2018, we won a ruling striking the complaint under California’s Anti-SLAPP statute.
Keller v. Electronic Arts Inc. et al
We secured a favorable settlement for Electronic Arts Inc. (EA) in this groundbreaking antitrust and right of publicity class action. Current and former student-athletes claimed EA improperly used the athletes’ likenesses and biographical information in its NCAA Football and NCAA Basketball video games.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Executive
We defended a former Citigroup executive in one of the rare financial crisis cases to go to trial. Our client worked on the structuring desk at Citigroup and was charged with securities fraud in connection with Citigroup’s 2007 marketing of a $1 billion collateralized debt obligation (CDO) backed by assets tied to the housing market. After a two week trial in the Southern District of New York, a jury rejected the SEC’s case and found our client not liable on any of the SEC’s claims.
Broadcom Corporation, et al. v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
On behalf of Broadcom, we led a joint-defense group of wireless chip manufacturers, PC manufacturers, and cellular network carriers. The plaintiff, CSIRO, asserted patent claims that allegedly covered a wide variety of products that offer wireless functionality under the IEEE 802.11 standard for local area networks. We settled the case favorably on the eve of trial.
March 09, 2023
Matan Shacham weighs in on Section 230 as it applies to AI-powered search engines. Read more
The Daily Journal has included the firm's win, undoing class certification in an antitrust suit against Qualcomm, among the Top Appellate Reversals of 2021. Read more
January 21, 2022
This 2-day program, 1/24/22 and 1/25/22, qualifies for 6 hours of general CLE credit, 1 hour of ethics credit, and 1 hour of elimination of bias credit.
Former president Donald Trump’s claim that the First Amendment shields his conduct leading up to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot is legally “spurious” and should be rejected as a federal court considers lawsuits that allege he incited the violence, four prominent First Amendment lawyers and scholars argued Thursday. Read more
Matan Shacham of Keker Van Nest & Peters has defended businesses, executives and individuals in high-stakes civil litigation cases across the telecommunications sphere, including Qualcomm in a key antitrust case brought by the Federal Trade Commission, earning him a spot among the telecommunications lawyers under age 40 honored by Law360 as Rising Stars. Read more
November 29, 2017
A panel of leading in-house and outside counsel litigators will discuss hot topics in IP litigation, including Section 101 and other recent developments. Read more
Cody Harris and Matan Shacham will officially join the partnership on January 1, 2017. Read more
Matan Shacham and his fellow panelists will cover cutting-edge issues in privacy law. Read more
Brook Dooley, Eric MacMichael, Matan Shacham and Katherine Lovett will cover the significant cases of 2014 and their impact. Read more
Matthias Kamber and Matan Shacham will present to the Bar Association of San Francisco's Barristers Club. Read more
This Barristers event features Asim Bhansali as a panelist and Matan Shacham as the moderator. Read more
Brook Dooley and Matan Shacham provide an overview of Section 17(a), the key differences between Section 17(a) and Rule 10b-5, and significant unanswered questions regarding Section 17(a). Read more
Keker & Van Nest defeats the SEC in this high-profile case. Read more
- "Hot Topics in Patent Litigation," BASF, 2017
- "Hot Topics in Privacy Law," BASF, 2016
- "Key Developments in Patent Law," presented with Matthias Kamber, BASF Barristers Club, 2015
- "White Collar Crime and Securities Enforcement," Bar Association of San Francisco, 2015
- "Key Developments in Patent Law," presented with Matthias Kamber, BASF Barristers Club, 2014
- "Securities Enforcement: 2013 in Review," Bloomberg BNA White Collar Crime Report, 2014, co-authored with Brook Dooley
- "How Your BA in English Can Help Your Patent Law Practice," BASF Barristers Club, 2013
- "Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933: Unanswered Questions," Bloomberg BNA Securities Regulation & Law Report, co-authored with Brook Dooley, 2013