Doug, who leads the firm’s Appellate and Supreme Court practice, has presented nearly 100 appellate arguments, including 18 times before the U.S. Supreme Court and before every federal circuit court of appeals. He has briefed and argued both civil and criminal matters covering a wide range of subjects and has particular experience in the areas of administrative and constitutional law, intellectual property, bankruptcy, the False Claims Act, securities law, and antitrust. Doug has also extensive experience litigating issues of concern to companies and foreign governments with international activities, including the Alien Tort Statute, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and forum non conveniens.

Doug collaborates with colleagues across numerous practice areas. In addition to handling appeals, Doug works closely with trial court colleagues to present the most compelling dispositive motions and to preserve our clients’ rights to appeal if necessary. He routinely consults with clients about avenues for challenging administrative actions and advises clients about the constitutionality of legislation affecting their interests.

Doug rejoined the firm in 2010 after spending more than a decade handling civil appeals and Supreme Court litigation for the U.S. Department of Justice. Between 2004 and 2009, he was an Assistant to the Solicitor General, where he briefed and argued cases on behalf of the United States before the Supreme Court. Doug has argued 18 cases before the Supreme Court and filed more than 200 briefs in that Court. In a single month in 2015, Doug argued before the Supreme Court both in the highly-publicized landmark marriage equality case (Obergefell v. Hodges) and a key bankruptcy case regarding whether an order denying confirmation of a bankruptcy plan is appealable (Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank).


Administrative and Constitutional Law

  • Obergefell v. Hodges (S.Ct.) – successful challenge to states’ denial to same-sex couples of the right to marry
  • Pavan v. Smith (S.Ct.) – successful challenge to states’ denial to married same-sex spouses of the equal right of to be listed on their children’s birth certificates
  • Shurtleff v. City of Boston (S.Ct.) – regarding the First Amendment government speech doctrine
  • Pfizer v. HHS (2d Cir.) – challenge to Office of Inspector General construction of Anti-Kickback Statute
  • United States v. Caronia (2d Cir.) – successful challenge to FDA prosecution for “off-label promotion”
  • Wollschlaeger v. Farmer (11th Cir.) – successful First Amendment challenge to Florida law preventing doctors from speaking freely with patients about gun safety
  • Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Alex M. Azar II (4th Cir.) – regarding access to high-quality reproductive health care
  • Santa Cruz Lesbian and Gay Community Center v. Trump. (N.D. Ca.) -- successful First Amendment challenge Executive Order forbidding government contractors from conducting diversity trainings utilizing concepts like “white privilege” and “implicit bias.”
  • AMA v. HHS (D.D.C.) – APA challenge to regulation implementing No Surprises Act
  • United Spinal Association v. Saul (D.D.C.) – APA challenge to SSA rejection of electronic signatures
  • Pacira Pharmaceuticals v. FDA (S.D.N.Y.) – successful APA challenge to FDA assertion of “off-label” promotion

Intellectual Property

  • Versata v. SAP (Fed. Cir; S.Ct.) – advised client regarding appeals and rehearing briefs and filed petition for certiorari regarding interplay of district court infringement litigation and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) proceedings under the America Invents Act
  • Progressive v. Liberty Mutual (Fed. Cir.) – represent client in seven appeals from PTAB decisions declaring Progressive’s patents invalid
  • Maxim v. BB&T (Fed. Cir.) – represent national bank in appeal regarding multi-jurisdictional infringement litigation
  • Unified Messaging Solutions v. Google (Fed. Cir.) – represent national bank in multi-party appeal from judgment of non-infringement
  • Microsoft v. i4i (S.Ct.) – amicus brief for 19 venture capital firms in defense of “clear and convincing” standard for proving patent invalidity
  • Stanford v. Roche (S.Ct.) – amicus brief for 80 higher education institutions regarding ownership of federally funded inventions
  • MGM v. Grokster (S.Ct.) – regarding secondary liability of file-sharing services for copyright infringement


  • Representing amici curiae law professors in connection with their submission to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals regarding third party releases in the Purdue Pharma chapter 11 cases. 
  • Mission Products Holdings v. Tempnology (S.Ct.) – regarding effect of rejection by debtor in bankruptcy of a trademark license
  • Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank (S.Ct.) – regarding immediate appeal from denial of plan confirmation
  • Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (S.Ct.) – regarding authority of non-Article III bankruptcy judges to enter final judgment of the United States
  • Clark v. Rameker (S.Ct.) – amicus brief regarding status of inherited IRAs in bankruptcy
  • Kirschner v. FitzSimons (S.Ct./2d Cir.) – regarding standard for intentional fraudulent claims against public shareholders
  • In re Tribune Co. Fraudulent Conveyance Lit.(2d Cir.) – regarding creditor constructive fraudulent conveyance claims against public shareholders

False Claims Act

  • Graham County v. U.S. ex rel. Wilson (S.Ct.), (2005) – regarding the FCA statute of limitations
  • Graham County v. U.S. ex rel. Wilson (S.Ct.), (2009) – regarding the FCA public disclosure bar
  • U.S. ex rel. Dan Abrams Co. v. Medtronic (9th Cir.) – regarding standard for alleging FCA liability based on off-label use
  • U.S. ex rel. Solis v. Millennium (9th Cir.) – regarding standard for alleging FCA liability based on off-label promotion
  • US ex rel. Owsley v. Fazzi Associates (6th Cir) – regarding standard for pleading submission of false claims
  • U.S. ex. rel. Paulos v. Stryker Corp. (8th Cir.) – regarding public disclosure bar and Rule 9(b) pleading standard
  • U.S. ex rel. Nowak v. Medtronic (D. Mass) – successful motion to dismiss FCA qui tam based on allegations of off-label promotion
  • U.S. ex rel. Solis v. Millennium Pharmaceuticals (E.D. Ca.) – regarding scope of FCA liability for off-label promotion

Securities Litigation

  • Merck v. Reynolds (S.Ct.) – relating to the statute of limitations for securities fraud claims
  • Welgus v. Trinet Group, Inc. (9th Cir.) – affirming dismissal of securities class action
  • Employees’ Retirement System of Government of the Virgin Islands et al. v. Blanford (2d Cir.) – regarding dismissal of securities class action alleging fraud in company’s statements concerning inventory and demand
  • Kuyat v. BioMimetic Therapeutics, Inc. (6th Cir.) – affirming dismissal of a securities class action alleging fraud in the company’s statements concerning its flagship medical product
  • In re ProShares Trust Securities Litigation (2d Cir.) – affirming dismissal of securities class action alleging inadequate risk disclosure in registration statement


  • Credit Suisse v. Billing, (S.Ct.) – concerning the immunity of IPO underwriters from antitrust liability
  • FTC v. Actavis (S.Ct.) – amicus brief on behalf of pharmaceutical industry association regarding antitrust liability for patent infringement settlements involving agreement not to enter market
  • North Carolina Bd. of Dental Examiners v. FTC (S.Ct.) – amicus brief on behalf of association of dental support organizations regarding antitrust immunity of state agencies composed of market participants

International law and Foreign Sovereign Immunity

  • Republic of Iraq v. Beaty (S.Ct.) – addressing application of the FSIA’s terrorism exception
  • Sinochem Intern. Co. Ltd. v. Malaysia Intern. Shipping Corp. (S.Ct.) – addressing dismissal for forum non conveniens
  • American Isuzu Motors v. Ntsebeza (S.Ct. petition-stage) – addressing when multinational corporations can be sued under the Alien Tort Statute for their business activities in foreign countries
  • Jesner v. Arab Bank (S.Ct./2d Cir.) – re scope of liability under the Alien Tort Statute
  • Force v. Qatar Charity (E.D.N.Y.) – re scope of liability under Anti- Terrorism Act

Areas of Practice