Matan Shacham defends businesses, executives, and professionals in high-stakes, complex civil litigation. He has tried eight cases to verdict in federal and state courts 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 has extensive experience litigating cases involving a wide range of subject-areas. He has defended attorneys—from international AmLaw 100 firms, regional boutiques, and plaintiff-side firms—in legal malpractice lawsuits. He has represented executives in high-profile securities cases and other complicated business disputes. He has defended leading social media companies, including Facebook and GoFundMe, in cutting-edge internet-law disputes involving content and advertising. He has also represented some of the country’s top technology companies in antitrust, patent, and trade secret litigation.
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 Inc.
We are defending Qualcomm against Federal Trade Commission claims that that it violated antitrust laws through its patent-licensing practices. The FTC alleged that Qualcomm engaged in exclusionary conduct that increased its competitors’ baseband processor costs, reduced competitors’ ability and incentive to innovate, and raised consumers’ costs for phones and tablets. During a 10-day bench trial in San Jose federal court, we argued that the FTC’s novel antitrust theory was foreclosed by Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court antitrust precedents, and that Qualcomm’s business practices drove ever-increasing innovation in one of the country’s most successful industries. Judge Lucy Koh issued a permanent injunction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has stayed Judge Koh’s order and injunction, finding that Qualcomm has raised serious questions about the merits and shown irreparable harm.
In re Qualcomm Patent Licensing Antitrust Litigation
We are defending Qualcomm against antitrust claims from a class of 250 million cellphone users that accuse the chip giant of inflating mobile device prices through heavy-handed licensing tactics. In September 2018, Judge Koh certified the consumer class in the case, which seeks billions in damages. We successfully petitioned the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory review of the court’s class certification order under Rule 23(f) arguing that the court had improperly applied California antitrust law (the Cartwright Act) to a nationwide class contrary to Ninth Circuit precedent. The U.S. Department of Justice along with the states of Louisiana, Ohio and Texas filed amicus briefs supporting Qualcomm’s appeal of the class certification order. The appeal was argued in December of 2019, and a decision is pending.
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.
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. He 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. In its enforcement action the SEC contended that Citigroup had played a role in the selection of the CDO’s underlying mortgage securities and had taken a short position in those securities. The SEC contended that our client was negligent for not disclosing information about Citigroup’s actions in its marketing materials. After a two-week jury trial in the Southern District of New York with Judge Rakoff presiding, the federal 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.
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