Apple Inc. has taken legal action to dismiss a federal lawsuit accusing the company of misappropriating trade secrets used to develop its popular digital wallet platform, Apple Pay. The lawsuit, filed by payment technology firm Fintiv Inc., alleges that Apple unlawfully used proprietary mobile payment innovations that Fintiv acquired in 2014. Apple’s latest motion seeks to end the case entirely, arguing that Fintiv’s claims are both legally and procedurally defective.

Apple Asserts Lawsuit Is “Time-Barred” and Lacking in Evidence

According to court documents filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Apple contends that Fintiv’s claims should be dismissed because they were filed far too late. The company argues that Fintiv has been aware of the facts surrounding the alleged trade secret violations since at least 2014—the same year Apple Pay launched.

Fintiv’s Allegations: A Decade-Long Dispute Over Mobile Payment Technology

Fintiv Inc., a Texas-based fintech company headquartered in Austin, purchased the mobile commerce platform CorFire from a Georgia firm in 2014. CorFire’s technology was known for enabling secure mobile payments through tokenization and device-based authentication—features similar to those later used in Apple Pay.

Fintiv alleges that Apple gained access to CorFire’s proprietary systems during confidential discussions before Apple Pay’s public launch. The company claims that Apple “misappropriated trade secrets” and built Apple Pay using stolen know-how, which has since generated billions in profits.

In addition to the trade secret accusations, Fintiv’s lawsuit includes claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, asserting that Apple engaged in a “pattern of racketeering activity” by working with banks and credit card networks to collect transaction fees using technology derived from stolen trade secrets.

The complaint further names major financial institutions as participants in Apple’s alleged scheme, including Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Capital One, and Wells Fargo, along with card networks such as Visa, Mastercard, and American Express. According to Fintiv, these companies benefited from Apple’s technology and continue to profit through the use of Apple Pay.

Apple Denies Wrongdoing, Cites Lack of Legal Basis

In its motion to dismiss, Apple denies any wrongdoing and maintains that the company developed Apple Pay independently. The tech giant argues that Fintiv’s allegations are “unsupported by facts and inconsistent with established legal standards.”

Apple further asserts that the RICO claims are baseless, pointing out that Fintiv failed to demonstrate a pattern of criminal conduct—a requirement for sustaining such allegations. “There is no evidence of any racketeering enterprise,” Apple’s filing states. “At most, Fintiv has alleged ordinary business relationships, which do not meet the threshold for a RICO violation.”

The company also emphasized that Fintiv’s trade secret claims are redundant and speculative, lacking the specificity required to prove that Apple had access to or used the alleged confidential information.

Apple Requests Case Transfer to Texas Federal Court

If the court declines to dismiss the case outright, Apple has proposed transferring the matter to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, where similar disputes between the two companies have previously been litigated.

In 2022, Judge Alan Albright of the Waco federal court dismissed a separate patent lawsuit Fintiv brought against Apple over similar payment technology claims. Apple argues that Judge Albright’s familiarity with the parties and issues would allow for a more efficient resolution of this case.

“Transferring the case to Texas would promote judicial economy and consistency,” Apple noted in its filing. “Georgia has little connection to the dispute, and duplicating proceedings in a new jurisdiction serves no purpose.”

Fintiv’s Legal Battle Against Apple Continues

Fintiv’s claims are the latest in a series of legal challenges it has brought against Apple over the past decade. The company has pursued multiple patent and intellectual property disputes, asserting that Apple unfairly leveraged CorFire’s technologies to dominate the mobile payment market.

Fintiv’s CEO previously stated that Apple Pay’s success came “at the expense of the rightful owners of the underlying technology,” arguing that the company’s conduct has harmed competition and innovation in the fintech sector.

Apple Pay, launched in October 2014, quickly became one of the most widely used digital payment systems worldwide. By linking users’ credit and debit cards to Apple devices, the service allows secure, contactless transactions both online and in stores. According to market research, Apple Pay now processes billions of transactions annually, generating substantial service revenue for Apple through fees paid by card issuers.

Legal Experts Weigh In

Legal analysts suggest that Apple’s strategy to seek dismissal or transfer may hinge on procedural rather than substantive defenses. “Apple’s motion is a strong opening move,” said one intellectual property attorney familiar with the case. “By arguing that the claims are time-barred and lack a factual foundation, Apple positions itself to either end the case early or push it back to Texas, where prior rulings favor its position.”

However, others note that Fintiv could still amend its complaint or provide additional evidence to sustain some of its claims. “RICO claims are difficult to prove,” one expert added, “but trade secret disputes often depend on the details—what information was actually shared, under what terms, and how it was allegedly used.”

Case Information

The case is Fintiv Inc. v. Apple Inc., filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, case number 25-04413. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for the protection of proprietary technology in the rapidly evolving fintech sector.

For more updates on high-profile technology and intellectual property lawsuits, visit LawCrossing.com — your source for the latest legal news, insights, and career opportunities across the U.S. legal market.

The post Apple Moves to Dismiss Trade Secrets and RICO Lawsuit Over Apple Pay first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

In a landmark financial performance, Goodwin Procter LLP has announced a record-breaking $2.7 billion in annual revenue, underscoring its powerful momentum in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and complex litigation. The impressive total marks a 12% increase from the previous year, setting a new benchmark for the Boston-founded Am Law 50 firm and signaling continued demand in key growth sectors.

A Strategic Shift Yields Historic Growth

According to Anthony McCusker, the firm’s chair and one of the architects behind its “Goodwin 2033” strategic vision, the year’s results stem from a focused effort to enhance collaboration between transactional and litigation teams. The firm has intentionally blurred the traditional divide between its dealmakers and litigators, ensuring cross-discipline agility and deeper client engagement across industries like life sciences, private equity, real estate, and technology.

The strategy appears to be paying off handsomely. Amid volatile market conditions, rising interest rates, and regulatory pressures, Goodwin’s deal and dispute teams continued to attract marquee clients and headline transactions—especially in private equity and capital markets, where the firm maintains one of the largest dedicated practices in the United States.

Litigation Arm Powers Ahead

Goodwin’s litigation practice emerged as a central growth engine, fueled by a surge in intellectual property, securities, and commercial disputes. The firm’s IP litigators were particularly active representing clients in life sciences and tech, two industries undergoing heightened patent-infringement battles and investor-driven lawsuits.

The litigation team’s success dovetails with Goodwin’s increasing work in shareholder activism and takeover defense, areas seeing a sharp uptick as investors pressure boards and management teams. To further strengthen that front, Goodwin recently brought on Leonard Wood, formerly of Sidley Austin, to spearhead its activism and takeover-defense group. His arrival reflects the firm’s intent to capitalize on a growing niche at the intersection of corporate governance and litigation.

M&A Excellence and Sector Diversification

While litigation brought substantial billings, M&A work remained Goodwin’s bedrock. The firm advised on several billion-dollar transactions in healthcare, real estate, fintech, and venture-capital spaces.

Private-equity and fund formation teams also delivered standout performances, advising both emerging managers and institutional investors on fund structures, exits, and secondary transactions. Goodwin’s long-standing relationships with venture-capital clients gave it a front-row seat to a market that—despite headwinds—continued to produce liquidity events and consolidation opportunities.

The firm’s healthcare and life-sciences practices were similarly buoyant, assisting biotech and pharmaceutical clients with mergers, licensing deals, and regulatory matters, particularly those tied to FDA and compliance concerns.

Leadership Transition and Vision for 2026

Looking ahead, Goodwin is preparing for a leadership transition set to take effect in October 2026. Joshua Klatzkin, a partner in the private-equity group, is slated to succeed Managing Partner Mark Bettencourt. Klatzkin, who has represented some of the firm’s largest fund clients, is expected to continue the firm’s trajectory of integrating transactional sophistication with cutting-edge litigation strategies.

McCusker emphasized that Goodwin’s success is not predicated on expansion through mergers—a popular trend among elite law firms—but rather through strategic discipline and client-focused innovation. “We’re not chasing mergers or headlines,” he said. “We’re building sustainable value through smarter structures and closer alignment with our clients’ long-term goals.”

Evolving Business Model and Alternative Fee Strategies

In a legal market increasingly demanding transparency and flexibility, Goodwin has embraced alternative fee arrangements (AFAs)—including fixed fees, success-based billing, and collaborations with litigation funders. These models have proven attractive to clients seeking predictability in high-stakes matters while allowing Goodwin to share in upside outcomes when favorable results are achieved.

The firm’s embrace of these progressive pricing structures has differentiated it from traditional competitors and contributed to steady client loyalty across industries.

Industry Context and Competitive Edge

Goodwin’s revenue growth roughly tracks broader trends in the Am Law 100, where leading firms reported an average increase of 11.4% in the first quarter of 2025, according to industry banking data. However, Goodwin’s consistent year-over-year trajectory and record revenue highlight its ability to maintain strong margins amid fierce competition for talent and slowing demand in certain transactional sectors.

By balancing its litigation boom with sustained M&A activity, the firm has created a resilient dual-engine model—one that positions it to weather market fluctuations more effectively than firms with narrower practice bases.

Future Outlook

As Goodwin continues to expand globally—particularly in New York, London, and Hong Kong—it is expected to double down on high-growth sectors like investment funds, fintech, healthcare, and ESG-driven corporate work. The firm’s 2033 strategic plan calls for ongoing investment in technology infrastructure, AI-enabled due-diligence tools, and enhanced client-service platforms.

With $2.7 billion in revenue, Goodwin has not only set a new internal record but also firmly secured its position among the most profitable global firms. The milestone reflects not just financial achievement, but a transformation in how modern firms structure, collaborate, and deliver legal services in a rapidly evolving marketplace.

💼 Stay Ahead in the Legal Industry
Goodwin Procter’s record-breaking year is just one sign of how fast the legal market is evolving. Don’t miss out on the latest law firm trends, career opportunities, and industry shifts shaping the future of law. Explore thousands of verified attorney and law firm positions today on our partner site LawCrossing.com — where top legal talent meets top opportunities.

The post Goodwin Procter Posts Record $2.7 B in Revenue Driven by M and A and Litigation first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

In one of the largest lateral moves of 2025, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP has significantly expanded its intellectual property litigation capabilities by welcoming a 21-lawyer team from Ropes & Gray LLP. The move marks a major strategic win for Sheppard Mullin, further positioning the firm as a go-to destination for high-stakes patent and technology disputes.

A High-Profile Departure from Ropes & Gray

Leading the group is Steven Pepe, the former chair of Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property litigation practice. Pepe is widely recognized as a top IP litigator with extensive experience representing technology and telecommunications companies in bet-the-company patent disputes. Alongside Pepe, four other partners — David Chun, Jim Davis, Kevin Post, and Matthew Shapiro — are joining Sheppard Mullin, bringing with them decades of combined experience and a track record of success before federal courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).

The lateral move includes counsel, associates, and professional staff, bringing the total number of new arrivals close to 30. The group will work across multiple offices, including New York, Silicon Valley, Seoul, and Washington, D.C., expanding Sheppard Mullin’s geographic reach and international capabilities.

Key Clients and Areas of Expertise

The team represents several prominent clients, including Samsung, eGenera, and Collision Communications, and is known for handling complex patent litigation in the high-tech and telecommunications sectors. Their work spans infringement actions, licensing disputes, and ITC investigations, as well as strategic counseling on IP protection and enforcement.

“Sheppard Mullin is doubling down on its commitment to innovation-driven sectors,” said Luca Salvi, chair of Sheppard Mullin. “The addition of this talented team is a major step in strengthening our ability to protect our clients’ most valuable intellectual property in today’s competitive and global marketplace.”

Strategic Growth for Sheppard Mullin

This move builds on Sheppard Mullin’s recent expansion efforts in its IP group. Earlier this year, the firm hired a life-sciences-focused litigation team from Perkins Coie, further enhancing its presence in the pharmaceutical and biotech arenas. The arrival of the Ropes & Gray team complements that strategy by adding a deep bench of patent litigators with strong ties to major technology clients.

Legal industry analysts have noted that group lateral moves of this size are relatively rare and often signal a strategic shift in client work. By bringing on a nearly entire practice group, Sheppard Mullin gains not only talented lawyers but also a pipeline of existing client matters and institutional knowledge.

Ropes & Gray Responds

Ropes & Gray acknowledged the departure in a statement, thanking the attorneys for their contributions and reaffirming the firm’s commitment to its intellectual property practice. The firm emphasized that it remains focused on growing its IP transactions and advisory services, which are crucial to its life sciences and healthcare clients.

While the loss of 21 lawyers is significant, Ropes & Gray continues to be a top-tier player in the IP and life sciences legal markets and is expected to rebuild its litigation team in the months ahead.

Market Impact

This move could shift the balance of power in the IP litigation market, particularly in the technology and telecom sectors. Sheppard Mullin now has one of the more robust IP litigation benches among Am Law 100 firms, better positioning it to compete with established powerhouses.

Group moves of this size have become more frequent in 2025 as law firms compete for talent and market share. Earlier this year, more than 40 litigators left Reed Smith to join Crowell & Moring, and Reed Smith later hired 37 lawyers from another firm to bolster its own ranks. The lateral market remains highly active as firms seek to expand their capabilities and capture new clients.

For clients, such moves often translate into greater resources, expanded geographic coverage, and more competitive pricing as firms fight to win and keep high-value litigation work.

Looking to make your next big career move, just like these top IP litigators? Visit LawCrossing today to access thousands of exclusive legal job listings, career resources, and insider market insights. Whether you’re an associate, partner, or in-house counsel, LawCrossing helps you find the right opportunities before they’re posted anywhere else. Don’t miss your chance to take control of your legal career—start your search now!

The post Massive Lateral Move: Ropes and Gray IP Leader and 21-Lawyer Team Join Sheppard Mullin first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Baker Botts, a prominent U.S. law firm, has announced the addition of a new partner specializing in intellectual property (IP) law to its San Francisco office. Rachael Lamkin, a seasoned attorney with a strong focus on patent litigation, will join the firm after running her solo practice since 2016.

Lamkin’s decision to join Baker Botts comes with the intention of bringing nearly all of her current clients to the Texas-founded law firm. Notably, she achieved significant victories in the past year by successfully defending technology company Garmin against two high-value patent infringement cases, collectively valued at around $1 billion.

With extensive experience representing clients before various legal bodies such as the U.S. International Trade Commission, the U.S. Court of International Trade, and federal district and appeals courts, Lamkin brings a wealth of expertise to Baker Botts. Earlier in her career, she served as a senior associate general counsel for well-known companies including OtterBox, LifeProof, and Blue Ocean brands.

See also: DLA Piper Snatches Top Talent: 30-Lawyer Patent Team Joins from Dentons

Lamkin expressed her admiration for Baker Botts‘ strong patent litigation team and expressed enthusiasm about collaborating with Lisa Kattan, the firm’s ITC practice group chair. The addition of Lamkin to the San Francisco office is expected to further bolster the firm’s capabilities in serving clients with complex IP disputes.

The legal landscape in California has recently seen a flurry of IP-related moves. Notably, other prominent law firms such as Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Cooley, and Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, and Popeo have all made significant hires in the IP litigation domain. Additionally, in March, a substantial 30-lawyer patent team from Dentons made a strategic move to DLA Piper, strengthening the latter’s presence in San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and Seattle.

The addition of Lamkin to Baker Botts reflects the firm’s commitment to expanding its IP capabilities and solidifying its position in the competitive legal market. With her impressive track record in patent litigation and a reputation for delivering favorable outcomes for her clients, Lamkin’s arrival is expected to enhance the firm’s ability to navigate complex IP disputes effectively.

As Baker Botts continues to grow its San Francisco team with top-tier legal talent, the firm is well-positioned to provide comprehensive legal services and strategic counsel to clients facing IP challenges. Lamkin’s arrival marks an exciting chapter for both her career and the firm’s IP practice, and it will be intriguing to see the collaborative efforts and successful outcomes that lie ahead under the Baker Botts banner.

The post Baker Botts Enhances San Francisco Team with Addition of Intellectual Property Litigation Expert first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: IP litigation attorney Brad R. Newberg joins McGuireWoods’ Intellectual Property Litigation and Patents Department today as a partner in Tysons Corner, Virginia, as the firm continues to boost its firepower in litigating copyright, trademark and digital rights disputes nationally and globally.

Newberg comes to McGuireWoods from the Falls Church, Virginia, office of Reed Smith, where he was lead attorney on many different intellectual property matters. In addition to his litigation work, he assists clients in navigating various laws that affect social media and other digital platforms. He also writes and speaks frequently on cutting-edge intellectual property issues and is an authoritative and widely sought source for journalists who cover high-profile copyright and trademark disputes, particularly those involving the media and entertainment industries.

He is the fifth partner to join McGuireWoods’ IP Litigation and Patents team this year, and his addition strengthens the team’s already formidable capabilities. Partners Darren Collins, Robert Hilton and Jason Cook joined McGuireWoods’ new Dallas office earlier this year, and life sciences partner Cedric Tan joined the firm’s Washington, D.C., office in July.

“Brad has been a first-chair litigator in dozens of copyright and trademark cases, and his experience across various industries improves an already strong team that is a tremendous asset for our clients,” said Brian C. Riopelle, chairman of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation and Patents Department.

Newberg has 15 years of experience in all aspects of intellectual property litigation and counseling, including a specific focus on copyright, trademark and domain name matters. He has practiced before various federal trial and appellate courts, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels, the Copyright Royalty Board, and state courts. He has been an expert witness in copyright and trademark cases.

Newberg earned his law degree from the University of Pennsylvania Law School in 1997. He graduated cum laude and was the Articles Editor of the Penn Law Review. He received two undergraduate degrees in economics from Penn, including a degree from Penn’s Wharton School of Business.

Looking for intellectual property attorney jobs in Virginia? Click here to browse current openings on LawCrossing.

The post IP Litigation Attorney Brad Newberg Joins McGuireWoods first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Mayer Brown announced on Thursday that a team of 11 lawyers led by well-known intellectual property lawyer Jamie Beaber has joined the law firm. The lawyers are leaving Steptoe & Johnson to join Mayer Brown. Beaber is joined in the move by four counsel and six associates in Washington DC and Chicago.

Speaking on the team joining Mayer Brown, the law firm’s co-leader of global Intellectual Property practice, Alan Grimaldi, said, “Jamie is well-known throughout the industry for his technical patent litigation work – particularly before the ITC bar – and we are thrilled to welcome him and his team to the firm.”

John Mancini, the other co-leader of the global Intellectual Property practice group of the firm added, “Jamie’s significant experience handling Section 337 cases before the ITC on behalf of a diverse array of technologies further enhances Mayer Brown’s existing capabilities in this area and will be a huge asset in servicing our global clients.”

Mr. Beaber has been practicing intellectual property law for close to two decades and is known for intellectual property litigation, including unfair import actions and customs issues related with Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. He has handled more than 50 investigations before the US International Trade Commission and also has extensive experience in representing clients before US district courts.

Beaber is affiliated with several bar associations and serves on numerous committees. Currently, he serves as the Co-Chair of the Federal Circuit Bar Association’s International Trade Committee. He is a frequent writer and speaker on patent litigation topics, including ITC proceedings and enforcement, Section 337 investigations and trade secrets. In 2012 and 2013, he was named a “Rising Star” by Law360 for his work handling high-stakes cases at the ITC.

Jamie Beaber holds an LLM from Georgetown University Law Center, a JD, magna cum laude, from Thomas M. Cooley Law, and a BS from the University of North Dakota.

This article explains what’s really going on at Thomas Cooley Law School: Thomas Cooley Law School Exposed (and Why Much of the Legal Profession is a Scam)

If you are looking for intellectual property attorney jobs, find them on this page on LawCrossing.

The post 11-Lawyer IP Team Moves to Mayer Brown from Steptoe & Johnson first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

As many of you know, in recent days, a number of traditional California based firms have announced increases to the base salaries paid to their associates… So, we are pleased today to announce an increase in the base salaries we will pay to each of our associate classes, effective June 1, as follows (these figures are at an annualized level):

First Year (Class of 2006) — $160,000
Second Year (2005) — $170,000
Third Year (2004) — $185,000
Fourth Year (2003) — $210,000
Fifth Year (2002) — $230,000
Sixth Year (2001) — $250,000
Seventh Year (2000) — $265,000
Eighth Year (1999) — $280,000

The partners of the firm appreciate your hard-work and many contributions to the firm’s continuing success.

Irell & Manella LLP was founded in 1941 by lawyers Lawrence E. Irell and Arthur Manella, and has grown to 220 lawyers. It has offices in Century City and Newport Beach.

The post Irell & Manella Announces Salary Increases first appeared on JDJournal Blog.