​Joshua Jessen is a partner in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher’s Orange County and Palo Alto offices.  He is a member of the firm’s Litigation Department and practices in the Privacy, Cybersecurity, and Consumer Protection Group, Intellectual Property Group, and Health Care and Life Sciences Group.

Mr. Jessen’s practice focuses on data privacy and cybersecurity, consumer law and class actions, complex commercial litigation, and intellectual property litigation.  He has represented many companies in putative data privacy and data security class actions, and has been instrumental in obtaining dismissals or other successful resolutions of those actions.  Mr. Jessen also has represented a wide array of clients in high-stakes patent, copyright, trademark, and right-of-publicity litigation.  In addition, he was involved in the defense of a significant white collar criminal matter relating to alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Mr. Jessen was named a national “Rising Star” by Law360, which identified him as one of five lawyers to watch in 2012 in the privacy and consumer protection practice area.  The Recorder also named him as one of its 50 “Fast Track” lawyers in 2012, which recognizes California attorneys “whose early accomplishments indicate they will be tomorrow’s top lawyers and leaders.”

In addition, Mr. Jessen has acted as a guardian ad litem, on a pro bono basis, for children affected by temporary protective order proceedings, and he previously completed a two-month stint as a Deputy District Attorney in the Orange County District Attorney’s Office, where he examined approximately 25 witnesses in open court and obtained a conviction – after a jury trial – in a case believed to be unwinnable.

Mr. Jessen earned his law degree magna cum laude in 2002 from the University of San Diego School of Law, where he was a member of the Order of the Coif and Lead Articles Editor of the San Diego Law Review.  While attending law school, he served as a judicial extern for U.S. Magistrate Judge James Stiven.  Mr. Jessen graduated magna cum laude in 1996 from the University of Pennsylvania with a Bachelor of Arts degree in History.  From 1994 to 1995, Mr. Jessen studied at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University. In 2017, Mr. Jessen served as a Lecturer at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, where he taught the Cyber Victims Defense Clinic.

Mr. Jessen is admitted to practice law in the State of California.  He is also a member of the bar of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. District Courts for the Central, Southern, Northern, and Eastern Districts of California, and the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.

Representative Matters

Consumer Litigation and Class Actions

• Taylor v. Sunrise: Representing Sunrise in a putative class action alleging violations of Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act.
• Wuest v. PepsiCo, Inc.:  Successfully represented PepsiCo in a putative class action alleging violations of California’s Invasion of Privacy Act.
• Barrett v. Wynn Las Vegas:  Successfully represented Wynn Las Vegas in a putative class action alleging violations of California’s Invasion of Privacy Act.
• Campbell v. Facebook, Inc.:  Successfully represented Facebook in a putative nationwide class action alleging that Facebook intercepted users’ private messages in violation of federal and state wiretapping laws.
• In re Mobile Privacy MDL:  Obtained dismissal on behalf of mobile advertising and analytics networks in nationwide class action alleging that defendants collected and disclosed data and personal information from mobile devices without users’ knowledge and consent, on grounds that plaintiffs lacked Article III standing and failed to state a viable claim.
• LaCourt v. Specific Media, Inc.:  Obtained dismissal of claims asserted against leading online advertising network in consolidated class actions alleging use of “Flash cookies” to respawn deleted http browser cookies in connection with online behavioral advertising, on grounds that plaintiffs failed to plead injury in fact for purposes of demonstrating Article III standing.
• Hines v. OpenFeint, Inc.:  Obtained dismissal of class action against leading mobile social gaming platform asserting that OpenFeint’s platform permitted unauthorized third-party access to personal and identifying information.  Lead plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed action in response to our motion to dismiss.
• David v. St. Joseph Health System:  Obtained dismissal of class action against hospital system alleging violations of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and other state law claims in the wake of a data breach.
• Garvey v. Hulu; Kim v. KISSmetrics:  Defended online analytics provider and online publishers in multiple consumer class actions alleging the use of persistent technologies, including “ETags,” to track information about consumers in a manner allegedly intended to circumvent users’ browser settings.
• St. Joseph Health System Data Privacy Litigation:  Represented St. Joseph Health System and its affiliated hospitals in coordinated class actions in Orange County Superior Court, Civil Complex, asserting violations of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and other state law claims, arising from alleged disclosure of personal health information of 31,800 patients.

Copyright, Trademark and Right of Publicity Actions

• Grateful Dead Productions, Inc., et al. v. Sagan:  Represented performers and record companies (including Grateful Dead, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, Carlos Santana, and Sony Music Entertainment) in case asserting trademark infringement, violation of right of publicity, and copyright infringement in connection with defendants’ acquisition of Bill Graham archives and operation of Wolfgang’sVault.com; obtained dismissal of tortious interference counterclaims asserted by defendants.
• CytoSport v. Vital Pharmaceuticals:  Represented CytoSport, the maker of popular protein product Muscle Milk, in a trademark and trade dress infringement case against Vital Pharmaceuticals (“VPX”).  After the court entered a preliminary injunction against VPX, VPX brought counterclaims seeking to cancel the Muscle Milk trademark and obtain damages on the theory that the name “Muscle Milk” supposedly misled consumers, because it does not contain liquid dairy milk.  The court granted summary judgment in favor of CytoSport on all of the counterclaims and excluded VPX’s expert, leading to a favorable settlement of the claims CytoSport brought against VPX.

Patent Litigation

• Data Network Storage v. International Business Machines Corporation:  Represented IBM in patent litigation involving data network storage technology; successfully obtained stay of case pending determination of earlier-filed suit.
• Israel Bio-Engineering Project v. Amgen, Immunex, et al.:  Represented Geneva-based Serono International (now Merck-Serono), the world’s third-largest biotechnology company, in patent litigation pertaining to tumor necrosis factor binding proteins and the invention of novel therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.
• In re Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same:  Represented Tessera, Inc. in multiple ITC patent investigations against semiconductor companies and assembly subcontractors.

Health Care Litigation

• Vigil v. St. Joseph Hospital of Orange, et al.:  Represented hospital in case involving whistleblower allegations under California statutes, and allegations of wrongful termination, intentional torts and breach of contract; the case settled on extremely favorable terms to client.
• United States v. Tenet Healthcare Corp., et al.:  Represented a hospital company in a $300 million False Claims Act suit brought by the federal government alleging Medicare overbilling at over 100 hospital facilities nationwide.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

• United States v. Carson, et al.:  Represented the former CEO of a valve manufacturing company charged criminally with FCPA and Travel Act violations involving alleged payments to foreign officials in 30 countries.  In defense of this action, filed the first substantive challenge to the FCPA’s “foreign official” definition, a motion recognized by The Wall Street Journal and The American Lawyer as breaking new ground in FCPA litigation.