Jeremy M. Christiansen is a senior associate in the Washington, D.C. office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.  He is a member of the firm’s Appellate and Constitutional Law, Litigation, Administrative and Regulatory, and Intellectual Property Practice Groups.

Jeremy represents clients from a wide variety of industries in high-stakes appellate, litigation, and administrative law matters, including constitutional and agency action challenges, government enforcement defense, intellectual property matters, commercial disputes, and labor and employment cases.  His practice encompasses all stages of litigation from complaint to trial to appeal.  He has represented parties in numerous federal and state trial courts, and parties and amici in federal appellate courts across the country, including the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and D.C. Circuits, as well as the Supreme Court of the United States.  He has presented numerous oral arguments before state and federal trial courts and federal appellate courts (including en banc argument).  He was named by Super Lawyers as a Rising Star in Appellate Practice (2020 – 2023) and in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America for Appellate Practice (2021 – 2024) and Administrative / Regulatory Law (2024).

Before joining the firm, Jeremy served as a law clerk to the Honorable Jay S. Bybee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and to the Honorable Thomas R. Lee of the Utah Supreme Court.  Jeremy graduated summa cum laude and Order of the Coif from the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, where he served on the Executive Board of the Utah Law Review.

Representative matters include:

• Financial Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, 590 U.S. ___ (2020):  Represented general obligation bondholders and insurers before United States Supreme Court in historic separation-of-powers case presenting questions of whether the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico was unconstitutional under the Appointments Clause, and whether, if so, the actions of an unconstitutional agency can be validated by the de facto officer doctrine.
• Rimini St., Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc., 586 U.S. ___ (2019):  Obtained unanimous reversal of the Ninth Circuit’s judgment which had erroneously awarded $12.8 million in expert witness fees, jury consulting fees, and other non-taxable litigation expenditures as part of the “full costs” available under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 505.  Named by Law360 as #2 of the Top Ten Copyright Rulings of 2019.
• CFPB v. All American Check Cashing, 33 F.4th 218 (5th Cir. 2022) (en banc):  Secured vacatur of district court’s order denying motion for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that the CFPB’s structure violated the separation of powers, and remand to consider, among other things, whether the CFPB’s funding mechanism violated the Appropriations Clause and thus required dismissal of the case. The CFPB settled the case on remand, dismissing the case with prejudice and remitting the full amount of the proposed civil penalty.
• In re U.S. Office of Personnel Mgmt. Data Security Breach Litig., No. 1:14-mc-1394 (2023): Represented government contractor in data-breach class action stemming from breach of OPM’s computer systems, with a putative class of over 21 million members, before the district court and on multiple appeals to the D.C. Circuit; obtained final approval in the district court of favorable class settlement.
• Joy-Campbell v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., No. 2084CV1519-BLS1 (Mass. Sup. Ct., Suffolk):  Representing Uber in enforcement action brought by the Massachusetts Attorney General in which the government is seeking declaratory relief that drivers who use the Uber application have been misclassified and are employees rather than independent contractors.
• Cedar Band of Paiutes v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing and Urban Develop., No. 4:19-cv-30 (D. Utah 2019):  Secured preliminary injunction in bet-the-business litigation on behalf of tribally owned corporations; holding that HUD-issued Mortgagee Letter purporting to limit provision of down-payment assistance for Federal Housing Authority-insured loans violated the Administrative Procedure Act.  Agency fully the withdrew Mortgagee Letter.
• Match Group, Inc. v. Rad, No. 650287/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Commercial Div.) (2020):  Obtained dismissal on the pleadings of $400 million breach-of-contract damages theory on behalf of founder of the dating app, Tinder, with the court holding the “claw-back damages” theory “common to all” breach of contract claims alleged by the plaintiffs was precluded by the contract and also grounded “in a speculative and retrospective rewrite of the history of the parties’ relationship.”
• Claiborne v. Blauser, 934 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 2019):  Secured unanimous reversal of district court order denying pro se prisoner inmate’s motion for a new trial, and established, for the first time in the Ninth Circuit and in a published opinion, that prisoner litigants have a constitutional right against visible shackling in civil cases and are entitled to an individualized hearing before they may be restrained at trial.
• BWP Media USA, Inc. v. Polyvore.com, 922 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 2019):  Secured affirmance of dismissal of secondary and vicarious copyright infringement liability claims brought against fashion-oriented social media company; remainder of case remanded and settled favorably.
• Oracle USA, Inc. v. Rimini Street, Inc., 879 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2018):  Overturned $14 million state-law computer hacking verdict entered against third-party software service company and CEO, and vacated computer hacking and copyright infringement permanent injunctions and $28 million attorneys’ fees award; remainder of case affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part.