Bryn Williams represents clients in complex civil litigation and intellectual property disputes and advises individuals and businesses on pre-dispute matters. He represents both plaintiffs and defendants and has tried four cases to verdict in state and federal courts. He is an effective advocate for his clients and has successfully argued dispositive motions in courtrooms across the country.
Prior to joining Keker, Van Nest & Peters, Mr. Williams was an associate in the Los Angeles office of a mid-sized firm where he litigated cases in both state and federal court. He clerked for the Honorable Carlos Lucero of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Mr. Williams's pro bono work includes co-founding the Marriage Equality Litigation Project to challenge the Michigan ban on same-sex marriage at trial and on appeal (DeBoer v. Snyder), and serving as student director for the San Francisco Affirmative Litigation Project, in which he assisted the San Francisco City Attorney's Office in complex affirmative civil litigation in state and federal court, including the United States Supreme Court (Hollingsworth v. Perry).
Prior to attending law school, Mr. Williams served as the director for Point Alones Village Archaeological Research Project in Monterey, where he led a team of archaeologists excavating a 19th Century Chinese-American fishing village. He has also served as a visiting lecturer at Stanford and San Francisco State University teaching undergraduate courses on history, archaeology, and historical preservation.
Mr. Williams graduated from Yale Law School, earned his Ph.D. in anthropology from Stanford University, and earned his B.A. in anthropology with highest distinction from U.C. Berkeley.
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. Following an order certifying a nationwide class, the Ninth Circuit granted a petition for interlocutory review of the class certification order under Rule 23(f). We argued the appeal in December 2019 and await a decision from the Ninth Circuit.
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.