Julia Greenberg represents clients in high-stakes complex litigation, including commercial, intellectual property, and employment disputes for entertainment and technology companies. She has experience representing clients in state and federal courts, at trial and appellate levels, and in arbitration.
In recent cases, Julia has achieved successful outcomes for clients at all stages of litigation. In a 2024 trial, she defended a cybersecurity company against fraud and warranty claims that sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. During trial, she argued and won a motion limiting potentially millions in prejudgment interest from reaching the jury. The case ended with a complete defense verdict. In another recent high-profile win, she helped Netflix defeat sprawling patent infringement claims through tenacious and creative motions practice. Among other things, Julia argued a Section 101 motion that invalidated one of the 12 patents in the case.
Julia also maintains an active pro bono practice. She is part of the team working with the ACLU in a putative class action against the Department of Homeland Security and Border Patrol, winning provisional class certification and a preliminary injunction against the government’s unlawful arrest and detention practices in the Eastern District of California. She has also represented individuals in civil and criminal proceedings, from obtaining a restraining order to stop elder abuse to securing release for an individual wrongfully serving a life sentence for a felony murder conviction.
Prior to joining Keker, Van Nest & Peters, Julia served as a law clerk to Judge Scott M. Matheson, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. She earned her J.D. from Stanford Law School and her B.A. in Philosophy from the University of Chicago. Before becoming a lawyer, Julia worked as a journalist in New York and San Francisco.
Alorica, Inc. v. Fortinet, Inc.
We represented secure networking company Fortinet, winning a complete defense verdict after a four-week jury trial in Santa Clara Superior Court where plaintiff Alorica sought compensatory damages of more than $200 million, plus additional enhancements for punitive damages. The jury found that Fortinet was not liable on Alorica’s claims of fraud and breach of warranty. KVP was retained a few months before the trial date, and in short order the defense team obtained several favorable pretrial rulings. Prior to the jury verdict, the KVP team also obtained directed verdicts on punitive damages and plaintiff’s largest claim for compensatory damages.
People v. Miles
We secured the release of Gennel Miles, Jr., who had spent 16 years in prison on a life sentence without parole on a murder conviction obtained under California’s former felony-murder law. As part of Keker’s Felony Murder Resentencing Project, which was initiated after California reformed its felony-murder law in 2019, we pursued a new evidentiary hearing for Gennel, ultimately uncovering evidence undermining the original conviction and obtaining a plea agreement for his release.
Broadcom v. Netflix
We defended Netflix against a 12-patent case Broadcom filed in the Central District of California. After transferring the case to the Northern District of California, we successfully invalidated 9 patents in the district court or through inter partes review. Broadcom agreed to dismiss the remaining three patents, and the Court entered judgment in favor of Netflix.
Runway AI Copyright Litigation
We are defending generative AI platform Runway in a copyright lawsuit filed by illustrators and visual artists alleging use of their works to train image models amounts to copyright infringement. We successfully narrowed the case through motion practice to eliminate claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the California state law claims.
United Farm Workers v. Noem
We serve as co-counsel with the ACLU foundations of California in a putative class action challenging unlawful immigration enforcement practices by the U.S. Border Patrol in the Eastern District of California. The lawsuit alleges that Border Patrol has engaged in a practice of unlawfully stopping and arresting long-term county residents based on skin color and appearance and then coercing them to accept deportation without due process. In April 2025, we obtained a preliminary injunction from the district court requiring federal agents to comply with constitutional and statutory standards of reasonable suspicion and probable cause when making stops and arrests within the district.
CoStar v. CREXi
We represented Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. (CREXi), a fast-growing online commercial real estate marketplace, in competitor litigation against industry giant CoStar. After CoStar filed a complaint against CREXi alleging copyright violations, we asserted antitrust counterclaims–—supported on appeal by the FTC—alleging that CoStar is an unlawful monopolist. We convinced the Ninth Circuit to reverse its dismissal of our antitrust claims in a unanimous, published opinion.
San Diego County Water Authority v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
For more than a decade, we have represented the San Diego County Water Authority in litigation against the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the regional water wholesaler for most of Southern California. We have led them through three separate trials, and represented them in three separate appeals, resulting in more than $100 million in recovered damages, interest and attorneys’ fees, plus legal victories that have provided more than $1 billion in long-term benefit to the Water Authority.
04/13/2026
A man imprisoned for 16 years under California’s former felony murder rule has been ordered released following a successful resentencing effort by Keker, Van Nest & Peters’ Felony Murder Resentencing Project, a pro bono initiative that has helped seven individuals reduce or overturn their life sentences to date since criminal justice reforms were enacted in California in 2019. Read more
04/02/2026
Yesterday, a federal district court ruled that the U.S. Border Patrol violated a prior court order during a July 2025 immigration operation in Sacramento, finding that agents conducted stops without reasonable suspicion and failed to properly document their actions. The court granted a motion to enforce a preliminary injunction in United Farm Workers v. Noem, reinforcing constitutional limits on Border Patrol operations in California’s Eastern District. Read more
04/02/2026
A federal judge ruled that the U.S. Border Patrol violated a court order during a July 2025 operation at a Sacramento Home Depot, finding that agents unlawfully detained 11 day laborers without reasonable suspicion, Law360 reported. Read more
01/28/2026
A federal judge has refused to halt litigation challenging U.S. Border Patrol enforcement tactics in California’s Central Valley, allowing the case to proceed despite the government’s pending appeal. The lawsuit alleges that Border Patrol agents engaged in unconstitutional stops and arrests during immigration enforcement operations far from the border, as reported in the Daily Journal. Read more
10/20/2025
At Keker, Van Nest & Peters, pro bono work is an integral part of our firm. From challenging illegal mass deportation tactics, to pushing for criminal justice reform, to fighting for the rights of individuals and families, our attorneys take up causes that encapsulate our belief that lawyers have a duty to protect the rule of law and ensure access to justice. Read more
4/29/2025
A federal judge in California issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday requiring the Border Patrol to honor laws regarding reasonable suspicion and probable cause in the wake of a January operation that saw agents make scores of warrantless arrests in and around Bakersfield. Several media outlets reported on the judge’s order. Read more
04/29/2025
In a win for civil rights amid the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign, a federal district court in California issued a preliminary injunction barring U.S. Border Patrol from using stop-and-arrest practices that violate federal law and the U.S. Constitution. Keker, Van Nest & Peters and the ACLU argued the successful motion on behalf of the United Farm Workers and plaintiffs. Read more
02/28/2025
The suit alleges “Operation Return to Sender” was a fishing expedition that indiscriminately targeted scores of residents, including U.S. citizens, through racial profiling. Read more
02/18/2025
Keker, Van Nest & Peters partners Bob Van Nest, Sharif Jacob, Sophie Hood and Ryan Wong reflect on the firm’s biggest trial wins which earned its place among Law360’s 2024 Trials Groups of the Year. Read more
10/24/2024
In celebration of National Pro Bono Week, we highlight the firm’s Felony Murder Resentencing Project, which has helped at least six incarcerated individuals overturn their life sentences. Read more