Ryan Azad is a litigation associate in the San Francisco office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and a member of the Appellate and Constitutional Law group. His practice focuses on appellate matters in state and federal courts.

Before joining the firm, Ryan clerked for Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar of the Supreme Court of California, Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr. of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. of the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.

Ryan received his J.D. from UCLA School of Law, where he served as a managing editor of the UCLA Law Review, was a member of the Supreme Court Clinic, and taught an undergraduate course as a Collegium of University Teaching Fellow. He earned his B.A., summa cum laude, in History from UCLA, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and received the Carey McWilliams Award for his thesis on the freedom of speech in colonial America.

Ryan serves as a mentor for The Appellate Project, an organization that seeks to empower law students of color to succeed as appellate attorneys and raise awareness about the importance of a diverse appellate system.

Representative matters include:

• City of Los Angeles v. PwC  (California Supreme Court): Persuaded the California Supreme Court to grant review of a case concerning the scope and nature of courts’ authority to impose monetary sanctions for discovery abuse.
• Vargas v. Facebook  (Ninth Circuit): Represented Facebook in putative class action challenging Facebook’s advertising platform as violating the Fair Housing Act and other federal and state anti-discrimination laws.
• Palomares v. United States  (U.S. Supreme Court): Represented amicus curiae FAMM (Families Against Mandatory Minimums) in support of certiorari petition regarding the proper interpretation of the federal sentencing statute’s safety-valve provision, as amended by the First Step Act of 2018.
• Campbell v. DoorDash, Inc.  (California Supreme Court & U.S. Supreme Court): Represented DoorDash in challenge to California’s “Iskanian Rule” as preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.
• See’s Candies, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California Court of Appeal): Represented eight amici, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in writ proceeding regarding whether COVID-19 injuries sustained by an employee’s spouse are encompassed by the derivative injury rule of the Workers’ Compensation Act.
• Vedagarba v. Airbnb, Inc.  (California Court of Appeal): Successfully represented Airbnb in obtaining dismissal of an appeal challenging the denial of plaintiff’s petition to vacate an arbitration award.
• Sanchez v. Mayorkas  (U.S. Supreme Court): Represented amici law professors in support of allowing temporary protected status recipients to seek adjustment to lawful permanent resident status.
• Liu v. Garland  (Ninth Circuit): Represented Chinese immigrant challenging an Immigration Judge’s denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture on adverse credibility grounds.