Derek F. Foran

Derek F. Foran

Education

St. Patrick's College, Maynooth (B.A., 1991)
University College Dublin (, 1993)
Cornell Law School (J.D., 2002)

Bar Admissions

California

Derek Foran is a partner in the Litigation Department of Morrison & Foerster’s San Francisco office. He specializes in complex business litigation, with a focus on trial work. He has represented numerous public and private companies in high-stakes litigation in state and federal courts. Mr. Foran has been recognized multiple times by Super Lawyers magazine as a Northern California Super Lawyer.

Mr. Foran graduated summa cum laude from Cornell Law School in 2002, where he was second in his class and was elected to the Order of the Coif. While in law school Mr. Foran received the Kerr Memorial Prize for distinguished academic performance and multiple West Publishing Company Outstanding Scholastic Achievement Awards. He also served as Book Review Editor for the Cornell Law Review. Prior to joining Morrison & Foerster, Mr. Foran clerked for the Honorable Diarmuid O’Scannlain of the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals.

Mr. Foran has been recognized as a Northern California Super Lawyer every year since 2013, and his work has been recognized in The New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times. He is a member of the Board of Governors of the Association of Business Trial Lawyers, Northern California Chapter, and is an Executive Committee member of the Civil Litigation Committee of the San Francisco Bar Association. He is also a member of the board of directors of Bay Area Legal Aid.

Mr. Foran is originally from Ireland. He received his B.A. in liberal arts from St. Patrick’s College in 1991, and a Graduate Diploma in Irish folklore from University College Dublin in 1993.

John Russo Industrial Sheetmetal, Inc. v. Los Angeles World Airports Authority
(San Mateo Sup. Ct. 2013–present). Mr. Foran was co-trial counsel in a six-week jury trial in San Mateo Superior Court for Los Angeles World Airports Authority in a breach of contract action brought by a terminated contractor. Plaintiff’s damages included a claim for millions of dollars in future lost profits. The jury unanimously rejected plaintiff’s claims.
NAF v. Center for Medical Progress et al.
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2015–present). Lead counsel for the plaintiff in a case that arose out of the controversy surrounding the release of surreptitiously taken videotapes of Planned Parenthood physicians. On behalf of NAF, Mr. Foran led a team of lawyers to secure a preliminary injunction, preventing the release of further videotapes. Mr. Foran’s work on this matter has been featured in the national media, including The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, American Lawyer, and NPR. The case is expected to proceed to trial in federal district court in 2018.
HDMI Licensing LLC Licensing Disputes
(2010–present). Outside litigation counsel for HDMI Licensing LLC and representing the company in a series of ongoing disputes with adopters of HDMI technology over licensing fees due under HDMI’s patent and trademark licensing agreement.
In re TFT-LCD Antitrust Litigation
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2006–2015). Represented Seiko Epson Corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates in one of the largest antitrust price-fixing matters ever brought in the United States. The cases included direct and indirect purchaser class actions and dozens of large opt-out matters. Cumulative damages sought in these matters were in the billions of dollars.
Novadaq Technologies Inc. v. Karl Storz GMBH
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2015). Represented Novadaq Technologies in trademark infringement matter filed against Karl Storz regarding the use of the SPIES trademark on fluorescent imaging technology used in surgical devices.
In re McKesson AWP Litigation
(USDC, Mass. 2006–2012). Represented McKesson Corporation in a series of RICO, False Claims Act, and antitrust suits alleging pharmaceutical pricing fraud in federal and state healthcare programs.
Murthy v. IGATE Corporation
(Alameda Sup. Ct. 2013–2014). Represented IGATE Corporation in a high-profile breach of employment contract action brought by the company’s former CEO, Phaneesh Murthy. The case settled months before trial.
San Francisco District Attorney’s Office
(June–Aug. 2013). Seconded to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, where he handled multiple criminal cases, including jury trials, on a solo basis.
United States ex rel. v. Maxxam
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2009). Represented Maxxam, Inc. in federal False Claims Act litigation. The matter settled one week into trial in federal district court.
In Re JDS Uniphase Corporation Securities Litigation
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2007). Represented JDS Uniphase and three of its former officers in a class action securities case. Plaintiffs sought damages in excess of $20 billion, one of the largest damages claims ever presented at trial in the United States. After a four-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict on behalf of each of the defendants.
First California Title Co. v. Financial Title Co.
(LA Sup. Ct. 2006). Represented Mercury Companies, Inc., in a case involving alleged trade secret misappropriation and employee raiding claims. Following a two-month trial, the jury rejected the majority of plaintiffs’ claims, awarding only a fraction of the damages sought.
Gateway Title Co. v. Mercury Companies, Inc.
(LA Sup. Ct. 2006). Represented Mercury Companies, Inc., in a case brought by a competitor alleging trade secret infringement and employee raiding claims. Plaintiffs sought almost $100 million in compensatory damages. Following a three-month jury trial in LA Superior Court, the jury rejected the vast majority of the plaintiffs’ claims and awarded only minimal damages on the remaining claims.
California Portland Cement v. New West Energy
(JAMS Arbitration 2004). Represented New West Energy in a case involving allegations of breach of an electricity supply contract arising out of the California energy crisis, in which plaintiffs sought more than $70 million in damages. The arbitrators ruled unanimously in favor of New West Energy on all claims.
NAF v. Center for Medical Progress et al.
No. 16-15360 (9th Cir. 2016). Primary author of the briefs on appeal from the district court’s preliminary injunction order in this high-profile matter. In addition, prior to the preliminary injunction order, defendants filed two emergency writs and a direct appeal in the Ninth Circuit, multiple emergency motions in the Ninth Circuit to stay the trial court proceedings, and an emergency writ and motion to stay proceedings filed in the United States Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit and United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of NAF on each of these successive appeals and emergency motions.
Hedlund v. Educ. Resource Institute, Inc.
718 F.3d 848 (9th Cir. 2013). Appointed by the Ninth Circuit to represent appellant in this matter. This was Mr. Foran’s third such appointment. In a precedent-setting opinion involving the standards for receiving a discharge of student debt in bankruptcy, the Ninth Circuit unanimously reversed the trial court’s decision to deny the appellant an undue hardship discharge.
Vacation Village v. Clark County, Nevada
497 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2007). Authored amicus curiae brief for Airports Council International, a trade association representing government entities that own and operate airports in the United States. The case involved a claim by local property owners that a zoning ordinance restricting the height of structures on property adjoining a Las Vegas, Nevada airport violated the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution.
Wah Chang v. Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, LLC
507 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2007). Primary author of the appellate briefs in this consolidated appeal involving alleged violations of federal antitrust laws, RICO violations, violations of Oregon antitrust laws, and wrongful interference with contracts relating to the energy crisis in California and the Pacific Northwest. The district court’s decision dismissing the action as barred by the filed-rate doctrine, FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction, and federal preemption, was affirmed on appeal in a 2-1 decision.
Chaidez v. Gonzalez
476 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2006). Appointed by the Ninth Circuit to represent appellant in this matter concerning the notice provisions of the Immigration Act of 1990. In a precedent-setting opinion, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Mr. Foran’s client and unanimously reversed the trial court’s decision.
Port of Seattle v. Avista Corp.
175 Fed. Appx. 827 (9th Cir. 2006). Primary author of briefs on appeal in a case involving alleged violations of federal antitrust laws in the California and Pacific Northwest energy markets. The Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s decision that the claims were barred by the filed-rate doctrine and FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction.
Minidoka Irrigation District v. Dep’t of Interior
406 F.3d 567 (9th Cir. 2005). Authored amicus curiae brief on behalf of Calpine Corporation in a case involving the United States’ waiver of sovereign immunity under 43 U.S.C. § 390uu.

REPRESENTATIVE TRIAL COURT MATTERS

John Russo Industrial Sheetmetal, Inc. v. Los Angeles World Airports Authority
(San Mateo Sup. Ct. 2013–present). Mr. Foran was co-trial counsel in a six-week jury trial in San Mateo Superior Court for Los Angeles World Airports Authority in a breach of contract action brought by a terminated contractor. Plaintiff’s damages included a claim for millions of dollars in future lost profits. The jury unanimously rejected plaintiff’s claims.
NAF v. Center for Medical Progress et al.
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2015–present). Lead counsel for the plaintiff in a case that arose out of the controversy surrounding the release of surreptitiously taken videotapes of Planned Parenthood physicians. On behalf of NAF, Mr. Foran led a team of lawyers to secure a preliminary injunction, preventing the release of further videotapes. Mr. Foran’s work on this matter has been featured in the national media, including The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, American Lawyer, and NPR. The case is expected to proceed to trial in federal district court in 2018.
HDMI Licensing LLC Licensing Disputes
(2010–present). Outside litigation counsel for HDMI Licensing LLC and representing the company in a series of ongoing disputes with adopters of HDMI technology over licensing fees due under HDMI’s patent and trademark licensing agreement.
In re TFT-LCD Antitrust Litigation
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2006–2015). Represented Seiko Epson Corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates in one of the largest antitrust price-fixing matters ever brought in the United States. The cases included direct and indirect purchaser class actions and dozens of large opt-out matters. Cumulative damages sought in these matters were in the billions of dollars.
Novadaq Technologies Inc. v. Karl Storz GMBH
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2015). Represented Novadaq Technologies in trademark infringement matter filed against Karl Storz regarding the use of the SPIES trademark on fluorescent imaging technology used in surgical devices.
In re McKesson AWP Litigation
(USDC, Mass. 2006–2012). Represented McKesson Corporation in a series of RICO, False Claims Act, and antitrust suits alleging pharmaceutical pricing fraud in federal and state healthcare programs.
Murthy v. IGATE Corporation
(Alameda Sup. Ct. 2013–2014). Represented IGATE Corporation in a high-profile breach of employment contract action brought by the company’s former CEO, Phaneesh Murthy. The case settled months before trial.
San Francisco District Attorney’s Office
(June–Aug. 2013). Seconded to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, where he handled multiple criminal cases, including jury trials, on a solo basis.
United States ex rel. v. Maxxam
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2009). Represented Maxxam, Inc. in federal False Claims Act litigation. The matter settled one week into trial in federal district court.
In Re JDS Uniphase Corporation Securities Litigation
(USDC, N.D. Cal. 2007). Represented JDS Uniphase and three of its former officers in a class action securities case. Plaintiffs sought damages in excess of $20 billion, one of the largest damages claims ever presented at trial in the United States. After a four-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict on behalf of each of the defendants.
First California Title Co. v. Financial Title Co.
(LA Sup. Ct. 2006). Represented Mercury Companies, Inc., in a case involving alleged trade secret misappropriation and employee raiding claims. Following a two-month trial, the jury rejected the majority of plaintiffs’ claims, awarding only a fraction of the damages sought.
Gateway Title Co. v. Mercury Companies, Inc.
(LA Sup. Ct. 2006). Represented Mercury Companies, Inc., in a case brought by a competitor alleging trade secret infringement and employee raiding claims. Plaintiffs sought almost $100 million in compensatory damages. Following a three-month jury trial in LA Superior Court, the jury rejected the vast majority of the plaintiffs’ claims and awarded only minimal damages on the remaining claims.
California Portland Cement v. New West Energy
(JAMS Arbitration 2004). Represented New West Energy in a case involving allegations of breach of an electricity supply contract arising out of the California energy crisis, in which plaintiffs sought more than $70 million in damages. The arbitrators ruled unanimously in favor of New West Energy on all claims.



REPRESENTATIVE APPELLATE COURT MATTERS

NAF v. Center for Medical Progress et al.
No. 16-15360 (9th Cir. 2016). Primary author of the briefs on appeal from the district court’s preliminary injunction order in this high-profile matter. In addition, prior to the preliminary injunction order, defendants filed two emergency writs and a direct appeal in the Ninth Circuit, multiple emergency motions in the Ninth Circuit to stay the trial court proceedings, and an emergency writ and motion to stay proceedings filed in the United States Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit and United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of NAF on each of these successive appeals and emergency motions.
Hedlund v. Educ. Resource Institute, Inc.
718 F.3d 848 (9th Cir. 2013). Appointed by the Ninth Circuit to represent appellant in this matter. This was Mr. Foran’s third such appointment. In a precedent-setting opinion involving the standards for receiving a discharge of student debt in bankruptcy, the Ninth Circuit unanimously reversed the trial court’s decision to deny the appellant an undue hardship discharge.
Vacation Village v. Clark County, Nevada
497 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2007). Authored amicus curiae brief for Airports Council International, a trade association representing government entities that own and operate airports in the United States. The case involved a claim by local property owners that a zoning ordinance restricting the height of structures on property adjoining a Las Vegas, Nevada airport violated the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution.
Wah Chang v. Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, LLC
507 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2007). Primary author of the appellate briefs in this consolidated appeal involving alleged violations of federal antitrust laws, RICO violations, violations of Oregon antitrust laws, and wrongful interference with contracts relating to the energy crisis in California and the Pacific Northwest. The district court’s decision dismissing the action as barred by the filed-rate doctrine, FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction, and federal preemption, was affirmed on appeal in a 2-1 decision.
Chaidez v. Gonzalez
476 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2006). Appointed by the Ninth Circuit to represent appellant in this matter concerning the notice provisions of the Immigration Act of 1990. In a precedent-setting opinion, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Mr. Foran’s client and unanimously reversed the trial court’s decision.
Port of Seattle v. Avista Corp.
175 Fed. Appx. 827 (9th Cir. 2006). Primary author of briefs on appeal in a case involving alleged violations of federal antitrust laws in the California and Pacific Northwest energy markets. The Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s decision that the claims were barred by the filed-rate doctrine and FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction.
Minidoka Irrigation District v. Dep’t of Interior
406 F.3d 567 (9th Cir. 2005). Authored amicus curiae brief on behalf of Calpine Corporation in a case involving the United States’ waiver of sovereign immunity under 43 U.S.C. § 390uu.

Mr. Foran has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Northern California Super Lawyer from 2013 to 2017 and a California Rising Star in 2012. His work has also been recognized in The New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times.

Email Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

©1996-2017 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.