Silicon Valley Office
Tel: +1 650-801-5000
Fax: +1 firstname.lastname@example.org
Intellectual Property Litigation
Harvard Law School
(J.D., magna cum laude, 1990)
(B.A., summa cum laude, 1986)
“Making and Preserving the Record,” Demystifying Civil Appeals and Writs, February 27, 2014
“Practice before the California Supreme Court,” Demystifying Civil Appeals and Writs, February 27, 2014 (with Greg Wolff and Carin Fujisaki)
“State and Federal Differences,” Demystifying Civil Appeals and Writs, February 27, 2014
“Staying Judgments and Orders,” Demystifying Civil Appeals and Writs, February 27, 2014
"The Future of Expert Testimony in California: An Inside View of Sargon Enterprises,”
CalCPA Education Foundation, May 22, 2013.
“The Written Brief,”
The Appellate Process 2013, March 14, 2013 (with Ethan Schulman)
“Evaluating the Appeal,” “Staying the Judgment and Filing the Appeal,” “The Respondent’s Brief,” and “The Reply Brief,”
Real Appeal, March 16, 2012 (with various).
"Review of the Supreme Court's 2010 Term and Preview of What's Coming Next,"
Webinar, September 27, 2011.
"Staying Judgments" and "California Supreme Court,"
Appeals (Civil): Winning Strategies from Start to Finish, San Francisco, CA, September 22, 2011.
"First Monday: Appellate Lawyer’s Roundtable" (concerning upcoming Supreme Court Term),
The San Francisco Daily Journal, October 4, 2010.
"Stays and Motions,"
The Complete Appeal Conference, San Francisco, CA, October 30, 2009 (with Sarah Hofstadter).
"Writs and Other Extraordinary Appellate Procedures,"
Appellate Advocacy Seminars, San Francisco, January 11, 2008.
"Keep Oral Arguments On Target,"
The National Law Journal, February 19, 2007.
"Patent Law and the Roberts Court,"
Los Angeles Daily Journal IP Supplement, September 7, 2006.
"Appellate Oral Argument,"
Appellate Advocacy Seminars, San Francisco, CA, January 19, 2006.
"Constitutional Limits on Copyright,"
Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, February 2005 (with Sabrina Underwood).
"Baby UI: The End of Unemployment Insurance As We Know It?,"
Employee Relations Law Journal, Autumn 2000 (with Julia Broas).
"Effective Antidiscrimination Programs May Limit Punitive Damages Liability,"
Corporate Counselor, October 1999 (with Alison Marshall and John Kennedy).
"Applying Agency Theory in Employment Discrimination Cases,"
New York Law Journal, July 28, 1999 (with Alison Marshall and John Kennedy).
Jones Day, Litigation Department:
Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, Litigation Department:
Law Clerk to the Hon. A. Raymond Randolph:
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit,
Law Clerk to the Hon. Louis F. Oberdorfer:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia,
Member, California Academy of Appellate Lawyers
Member, American Constitution Society for Law and Public Policy:
Bay Area Chapter, Advisory Board
Certified Appellate Law Specialist, California Board of Legal Specialization
Member, The State Bar of California; United States Supreme Court; United States Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department; United States Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District; United States Courts of Appeals: Fourth Circuit, Second Circuit, Sixth Circuit, Seventh Circuit, Ninth Circuit, Eleventh Circuit, District of Columbia Circuit, Federal Circuit; United States District Courts: Southern District of New York, Eastern District of Michigan, District of Columbia; United States Court of Federal Claims
Send to a friend
A founding member of Quinn Emanuel’s appellate practice, Dan Bromberg is an appellate specialist based in Northern California. He has argued before the United States Supreme Court, state courts of final resort, federal courts of appeals, and state intermediate courts of appeals in California and other States. An experienced Supreme Court practitioner who is often asked to comment on recent developments in the Court, he has filed over three dozen briefs in the Supreme Court, including six successful petitions for certiorari. Mr. Bromberg is also an experienced California appellate lawyer who is versed in all aspects of California appellate practice and regularly teaches continuing education classes on appellate practice.
Mr. Bromberg is experienced in numerous substantive areas, including patents, trademarks, and other areas of IP law; commercial disputes; antitrust, ERISA, and securities law; transnational disputes; and constitutional law. As a result of the firm’s extensive trial practice, he also has extensive experience with appeals from trials involving multi-million and even billion dollar judgments, successfully overturning a $188 million judgment and reducing another judgment by $200 million as well as successfully defending multi-million dollar verdicts. Mr. Bromberg also recently successfully defended the exclusion of expert testimony seeking over $1 billion in lost profits in a landmark decision by the California Supreme Court establishing that California trial courts have a “gatekeeping” responsibility to exclude expert testimony that is speculative or otherwise unreliable.
Mr. Bromberg is rated “AV Preeminent” by Martindale Hubbell, its highest rating. He has been recognized as a “Best Lawyer” in appellate practice, an appellate “Super Lawyer,” and a "Top Rated Lawyer in Appellate Law." And he is a certified California appellate law specialist as well as a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers.
Mr. Bromberg’s clients include AIG, Allegheny Energy, Cisco, CNA, DIRECTV, Dole Food Company, Experian, Genentech, IAC/InterActiveCorp, Litton, Micron, Pfizer, RE/MAX, Sprint/Nextel, and TRW as well as numerous individuals and small businesses.
Representing Japanese ocean carrier Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. in the United States Supreme Court, obtained dismissal of claims based upon unanimous holding that ocean carriers are not subject to regulation as rail carriers merely because they make shipments from overseas that include a domestic rail leg.
Representing a Mississippi woodchip manufacturer in the U.S. Supreme Court, obtained unanimous decision holding that the venue provisions in the Federal Arbitration Act are permissive rather than restrictive.
Representing TRW Inc. in the U.S. Supreme Court, obtained unanimous decision holding that the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s statute of limitations in the Fair Credit Reporting Act does not incorporate the discovery rule.
Representing subsidiary of Textron in the U.S. Supreme Court, obtained unanimous decision holding that federal labor law does not confer jurisdiction over suits seeking to invalidate collective bargaining agreements.
Representing USC in the California Supreme Court, obtained unanimous decision upholding exclusion of expert opinion seeking $1.2 billion in lost profits and establishing that state trial courts have a “gatekeeping” responsibility requiring them to exclude speculative or unreliable expert testimony.
Representing Genentech in the California Supreme Court, obtained decision vacating $200 million punitive damages award.
Representing Allegheny Energy, Inc. in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, obtained decision vacating a $188 million verdict against Allegheny and reinstating counterclaims against Merrill Lynch.
Representing an agency of the Russian Federation in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, obtained reinstatement of claims that the agency is the rightful owner of the American trademarks for STOLICHNAYA vodka.
Representing Bridgestone/Firestone, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the National Association of Manufacturers in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, obtained decision invalidating executive order debarring government contractors that employed replacement workers.
Representing RE/MAX International, Inc. in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, obtained decision holding that an antitrust conspiracy may be established based upon parallel conduct and circumstantial evidence of an agreement.
Representing Experian in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, obtained decision recognizing restrictions on damage claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Representing Cisco in the United States District Court for Delaware, successfully moved for judgment as a matter of law reducing damages verdict by $70 million.
Representing real estate developers in the Third Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, obtained affirmance of $30 million verdict against a California municipality.
Representing a nearly ninety-year-old World War II veteran in the Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, obtained expedited affirmance of judgment restoring ownership of real estate estimated to be worth up to $200 million.
Representing movie producer in the Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, obtained affirmance of $5 million award against a hedge fund operator.
Representing AIG in Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, obtained affirmance of dismissal of Section 17200 claims concerning practices that led to the 2008 federal bailout.
Representing indigent prisoner in the Ninth Circuit, obtained decision reversing dismissal of claims for retaliation against exercise of First Amendment rights.
Representing indigent prisoner in the D.C. Circuit, obtained decision overturning plea bargain and leading to five-year reduction in sentence.
Representing Georgetown University students in the D.C. Court of Appeals, obtained decision ruling that college students have the right to vote in the District of Columbia free from any special test of residency.
Filed amicus curiae briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of clients such as Cisco, Google, Shell Oil Company, Time Warner, Visa USA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 26 states and the District of Columbia, four former Secretaries of the Interior, and the Conference of Chief Justices.