Los Angeles
A natural advocate, Sunny has first chaired litigation from inception through favorable resolution and successfully briefed and argued dispositive motions and appeals. Sunny is adept at all stages of discovery, comfortable with cross-border disputes, and experienced in both government and internal investigations. Sunny also has particular knowledge regarding the nuances of alternative dispute resolution, including drafting and enforcement of both B2B and B2C arbitration provisions.
Sunny jumpstarted his career by honing his research and writing skills as law clerk to Chief Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the federal District Court in Sacramento and judicial extern to the late Judge Harry Pregerson of the Ninth Circuit. Before law school, Sunny served for several years as a trade attache for the French government, covering the oenology and viticulture sector.
Sample engagements include:
Los Angeles
A natural advocate, Sunny has first chaired litigation from inception through favorable resolution and successfully briefed and argued dispositive motions and appeals. Sunny is adept at all stages of discovery, comfortable with cross-border disputes, and experienced in both government and internal investigations. Sunny also has particular knowledge regarding the nuances of alternative dispute resolution, including drafting and enforcement of both B2B and B2C arbitration provisions.
Sunny jumpstarted his career by honing his research and writing skills as law clerk to Chief Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the federal District Court in Sacramento and judicial extern to the late Judge Harry Pregerson of the Ninth Circuit. Before law school, Sunny served for several years as a trade attache for the French government, covering the oenology and viticulture sector.
Sample engagements include:
杜塞尔多夫
She has experience in telecommunications licensing disputes and litigating FRAND objections and D&O disputes, as well as in disputes under the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
In addition to experience in arbitration proceedings under the rules of the ICC, LCIA, UNCITRAL VIAC and the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce (ACHCCI), Ramona acts as administrative secretary in DIS arbitrations.
She is a lecturer in arbitration and international commercial law at the University of Bayreuth where she also coaches the university's team in the Willem C. Vis Moot. Further to her legal studies, Ramona has also completed a university degree in economics.
During her education, she worked in US firms in Germany and Paris, where she deepened her knowledge of arbitration, litigation, and dispute resolution. Prior to joining Orrick, Ramona worked as a litigation lawyer for a magic circle law firm in Germany, including patent litigation involving patent infringement, nullity, and patent vindication proceedings, particularly in the telecommunications and automotive industries.
杜塞尔多夫
She has experience in telecommunications licensing disputes and litigating FRAND objections and D&O disputes, as well as in disputes under the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
In addition to experience in arbitration proceedings under the rules of the ICC, LCIA, UNCITRAL VIAC and the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce (ACHCCI), Ramona acts as administrative secretary in DIS arbitrations.
She is a lecturer in arbitration and international commercial law at the University of Bayreuth where she also coaches the university's team in the Willem C. Vis Moot. Further to her legal studies, Ramona has also completed a university degree in economics.
During her education, she worked in US firms in Germany and Paris, where she deepened her knowledge of arbitration, litigation, and dispute resolution. Prior to joining Orrick, Ramona worked as a litigation lawyer for a magic circle law firm in Germany, including patent litigation involving patent infringement, nullity, and patent vindication proceedings, particularly in the telecommunications and automotive industries.
Los Angeles; 休斯敦
Los Angeles; 休斯敦
As both bond counsel and underwriter’s counsel, he has been responsible for
structuring and analyzing the tax aspects of many tax-exempt financings
throughout the country.
Larry has extensive experience in handling IRS
audits of bond transactions. He has represented issuers in dozens of audits all
of which have ended favorably either with the IRS issuing a “no change” letter
or by negotiating a reasonable settlement when needed. Larry also has handled a
number of submissions under the IRS’ Voluntary Closing Agreement Program (or
VCAP). The two most recent VCAP submissions represented cases of first
impression for the IRS; one involving an issue of qualified energy conservation
bonds relating to determining the amount of those bonds eligible for the federal
subsidy; the other involved the plan to convert a “new money” bond issue into an
advance refunding (which did not meet all of the requirements for a tax-exempt
advance refunding). Both cases ultimately were resolved on the original terms
proposed to the IRS.
Larry has also been instrumental in developing new
financing techniques and structures. He first devised the tax structure and
analysis for, and has served as tax counsel on, Orrick’s tax exempt tobacco
revenue securitizations. He has developed the tax structure on numerous
tax-exempt prepayments for natural gas for municipal utilities both within and
outside of California.
Los Angeles; 休斯敦
Los Angeles; 休斯敦
As both bond counsel and underwriter’s counsel, he has been responsible for
structuring and analyzing the tax aspects of many tax-exempt financings
throughout the country.
Larry has extensive experience in handling IRS
audits of bond transactions. He has represented issuers in dozens of audits all
of which have ended favorably either with the IRS issuing a “no change” letter
or by negotiating a reasonable settlement when needed. Larry also has handled a
number of submissions under the IRS’ Voluntary Closing Agreement Program (or
VCAP). The two most recent VCAP submissions represented cases of first
impression for the IRS; one involving an issue of qualified energy conservation
bonds relating to determining the amount of those bonds eligible for the federal
subsidy; the other involved the plan to convert a “new money” bond issue into an
advance refunding (which did not meet all of the requirements for a tax-exempt
advance refunding). Both cases ultimately were resolved on the original terms
proposed to the IRS.
Larry has also been instrumental in developing new
financing techniques and structures. He first devised the tax structure and
analysis for, and has served as tax counsel on, Orrick’s tax exempt tobacco
revenue securitizations. He has developed the tax structure on numerous
tax-exempt prepayments for natural gas for municipal utilities both within and
outside of California.
New York
Jordan has represented clients in an array of intellectual property disputes, including those involving patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and trademark infringement. He has also represented clients in disputes involving intellectual property licenses. Jordan has practiced in various federal district courts, as well as before the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the International Trade Commission, achieving successful outcomes for both plaintiffs and defendants at jury and bench trials alike.
In addition to his work in the life sciences sector, Jordan has substantial experience in the technology sector. He has litigated intellectual property disputes related to energy storage, OLED displays, base station antennas, fiber optics, and video game rendering. Jordan has also counseled clients on intellectual property licensing, patent prosecution and portfolio management, and intellectual property and information technology issues arising in commercial transactions.
Jordan maintains a robust pro bono practice and is currently involved in litigation concerning reproductive rights. He previously litigated claims of racial discrimination by police, which resulted in criminal justice reform within the police department. Jordan also helped exonerate a pro bono client, who had spent over 16 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit.
New York
Jordan has represented clients in an array of intellectual property disputes, including those involving patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and trademark infringement. He has also represented clients in disputes involving intellectual property licenses. Jordan has practiced in various federal district courts, as well as before the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the International Trade Commission, achieving successful outcomes for both plaintiffs and defendants at jury and bench trials alike.
In addition to his work in the life sciences sector, Jordan has substantial experience in the technology sector. He has litigated intellectual property disputes related to energy storage, OLED displays, base station antennas, fiber optics, and video game rendering. Jordan has also counseled clients on intellectual property licensing, patent prosecution and portfolio management, and intellectual property and information technology issues arising in commercial transactions.
Jordan maintains a robust pro bono practice and is currently involved in litigation concerning reproductive rights. He previously litigated claims of racial discrimination by police, which resulted in criminal justice reform within the police department. Jordan also helped exonerate a pro bono client, who had spent over 16 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit.
Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C.
Vann litigates in forums throughout the country. He has won several inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has secured favorable jury verdicts in Federal and state courts in Delaware, Florida, Maryland, and Texas. Multiple wins on behalf of his clients at the U.S. International Trade Commission in Section 337 investigations have earned recognition with “Disputes Deal of the Year” awards. And he has crafted winning strategies and briefs in precedent-setting Federal Circuit appeals.
A chemical engineer by training, Vann is a member of the Patent Bar. His representations involve a broad range of technology fields, including semiconductors, artificial intelligence, consumer electronics, 3D printing, automotive technologies, digital imaging, cryptocurrency, and batteries. His clients are based worldwide, including a significant portion from Japan and China. Vann frequently travels to Asia to speak on key developments in intellectual property law.
Patent infringement litigation is central to Vann’s practice, but he also has handled breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation, antitrust, tortious interference, false advertising, civil theft, and bankruptcy matters. Many of his matters involve a complex mix of claims and counterclaims across legal disciplines, where he employs his strategic judgment to navigate competing risks.
While his practice focuses on litigation and dispute resolution, Vann also advices clients on patent licensing, portfolio development, and intellectual property due diligence. Vann co-founded Orrick’s cross-practice 3D printing initiative.
Vann has served the Firm in key leadership roles. In 2022-2023, Vann served as the Chief Practice Officer for the firm's IP & Litigation Business Units, which comprise nearly 400 attorneys globally. His responsibilities included oversight of the units' financial performance, business planning and execution, and lawyer recruiting. Vann also previously served as the firm’s U.S. Law School Hiring Partner, overseeing entry-level hiring nationwide.
Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C.
Vann litigates in forums throughout the country. He has won several inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has secured favorable jury verdicts in Federal and state courts in Delaware, Florida, Maryland, and Texas. Multiple wins on behalf of his clients at the U.S. International Trade Commission in Section 337 investigations have earned recognition with “Disputes Deal of the Year” awards. And he has crafted winning strategies and briefs in precedent-setting Federal Circuit appeals.
A chemical engineer by training, Vann is a member of the Patent Bar. His representations involve a broad range of technology fields, including semiconductors, artificial intelligence, consumer electronics, 3D printing, automotive technologies, digital imaging, cryptocurrency, and batteries. His clients are based worldwide, including a significant portion from Japan and China. Vann frequently travels to Asia to speak on key developments in intellectual property law.
Patent infringement litigation is central to Vann’s practice, but he also has handled breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation, antitrust, tortious interference, false advertising, civil theft, and bankruptcy matters. Many of his matters involve a complex mix of claims and counterclaims across legal disciplines, where he employs his strategic judgment to navigate competing risks.
While his practice focuses on litigation and dispute resolution, Vann also advices clients on patent licensing, portfolio development, and intellectual property due diligence. Vann co-founded Orrick’s cross-practice 3D printing initiative.
Vann has served the Firm in key leadership roles. In 2022-2023, Vann served as the Chief Practice Officer for the firm's IP & Litigation Business Units, which comprise nearly 400 attorneys globally. His responsibilities included oversight of the units' financial performance, business planning and execution, and lawyer recruiting. Vann also previously served as the firm’s U.S. Law School Hiring Partner, overseeing entry-level hiring nationwide.
New York
Margaret represents companies and individuals in high-stakes litigation in federal and state courts nationwide. She has extensive experience in all stages of litigation, from pre-suit demands through the conclusion of the appellate process.
New York
Margaret represents companies and individuals in high-stakes litigation in federal and state courts nationwide. She has extensive experience in all stages of litigation, from pre-suit demands through the conclusion of the appellate process.