Ali Rabbani is litigation counsel in the firm’s Los Angeles office.

Mr. Rabbani concentrates his practice on complex commercial litigation, with an emphasis on consumer fraud and securities class action defense, corporate governance and shareholder disputes, intellectual property matters and bankruptcy litigation.

Practice & Background

Mr. Rabbani has extensive experience litigating complex commercial disputes in state and federal courts and in arbitrations. He has defended numerous class action lawsuits involving claims for false advertising, unfair business practices and violations of federal securities laws, among others. He has also handled a variety of corporate governance, intellectual property, bankruptcy and general commercial litigation matters. Mr. Rabbani has represented clients in a broad range of industries, including consumer electronics, food and beverage, retail, automotive, sports, entertainment, health care, insurance and energy.

On numerous occasions, Mr. Rabbani has obtained early dismissals at the pleadings stage and on motions for summary judgment, rulings denying class certification and favorable verdicts at trial. Most recently, Mr. Rabbani was a member of the trial team that secured a $42.5 million jury verdict, including $30 million in punitive damages, on behalf of a California-based distributor of home comfort products in a federal lawsuit against one of the world’s largest manufacturers of air conditioners and dehumidifiers. The verdict led the “Top Plaintiff Cases” section of the Daily Journal’s “Verdicts & Settlements” report, ranked 45 on the “Top 100 Verdicts of 2015” and was listed as the top verdict in Business Law in The Recorder’s California’s “Million Dollar Verdicts.”

Mr. Rabbani earned his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School, where he was the recipient of the John M. Olin Student Fellowship in Law and Economics. He earned his B.A. from Johns Hopkins University.

Representative Matters

Mr. Rabbani’s recent representations include:

  • Representation of a prominent trucking company in “bet the company” class action litigation regarding whether 18,000 drivers were defrauded into serving as independent contractor drivers based on alleged misrepresentations about their earning potential and benefits.
  • Representation of a distributor of home comfort products in a joint venture dispute against one of the world’s largest manufacturers of air conditioners and dehumidifiers. After a two-week trial in federal court, obtained a $42.5 million jury verdict, including $30 million in punitive damages.
  • Defense of a nutritional supplement company and several of its officers and directors in a putative class action alleging violations of California’s pyramid scheme and false advertising laws and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. After defeating class certification, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice.
  • Defense of an insurance underwriter in more than a dozen putative statewide class actions relating to the marketing and sale of group disability insurance coverage. After obtaining dismissal of all claims with prejudice in several jurisdictions, the parties reached a global settlement.
  • Defense of a Chinese automotive parts supplier and certain of its officers and directors in a federal securities fraud class action relating to alleged accounting improprieties. After defeating class certification on the ground that the plaintiffs were not entitled to a class-wide presumption of reliance based on the “fraud on the market” theory, the parties reached a settlement.
  • Defense of the directors of a Chinese automotive parts supplier in a shareholder derivative action asserting claims for insider trading, breaches of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment in connection with alleged accounting improprieties. Obtained dismissal of all claims with prejudice on a motion to dismiss.

Additional Class Action Representations:

  • Defense of a Japanese consumer electronics corporation in a putative nationwide class action alleging violations of numerous state consumer protection statutes arising from the marketing and sale of plasma televisions. Obtained dismissal of all claims with prejudice on a motion to dismiss.
  • Defense of a renewable resources company and certain of its officers and directors in a federal securities fraud class action arising from alleged false and misleading statements made in connection with a water conservation project.
  • Defense of a life insurance company in a putative nationwide class action alleging breach of certain universal life insurance policies arising from changes to the cost of insurance rates.
  • Defense of a breast pump manufacturer in a putative nationwide class action alleging violations of California’s consumer protection statutes in connection with the marketing and sale of breastfeeding accessories.
  • Defense of a women’s clothing and accessories retailer and its board of directors in a shareholder class action challenging its merger with an acquisition company.
  • Defense of a Brazilian food producer in a securities fraud class action brought by American Depositary Receipt holders in connection with the company’s foreign currency hedging activities.
  • Defense of an automobile insurance company in a putative nationwide class action brought on behalf of current and former subscribers of reciprocal insurance exchanges.

Additional Representations:

  • Representation of a golf apparel manufacturer in a breach of contract lawsuit against a professional golfer relating to the right of first refusal in the golfer’s endorsement agreement.
  • Pro bono representation of a small production studio in a high-profile copyright infringement action brought by major television and motion picture studios concerning the production of a fan-funded motion picture inspired by Star Trek.
  • Defense of an online video streaming company in an alleged copyright infringement action brought by a worldwide music corporation. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment on the basis that the company’s conduct fell within the Section 512(c) safe harbor of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
  • Representation of a professional baseball team in various litigation disputes in connection with its historic Chapter 11 case, which culminated in the sale of the team for more than $2 billion.
  • Representation of a securities clearing firm in a series of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitrations and lawsuits relating to an allegedly fraudulent dividend distribution.
  • Defense of one of the largest company-owned convenience store chains in litigation arising out of a competitor’s attempt to enjoin the client’s tender offer based on alleged violations of Section 14(e) of the Williams Act and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The competitor’s motion for preliminary injunction was denied.
  • Representation of a health care company in a series of arbitrations and lawsuits against health care providers pertaining to the interpretation of Medicare Part D regulations.
  • Representation of multiple investment banks and financial advisors in connection with contested and negotiated acquisitions.
  • Representation of numerous companies in connection with regulatory inquiries and investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and FINRA, as well as in connection with internal investigations.

Speaking Engagements

  • “Notable Recent & Pending Cases in the 9th Circuit and SCOTUS,” Bridgeport 2017 Class Action Litigation Conference, April 2017
  • “Trends in Consumer Class Actions: How to Avoid Becoming a Target,” Akin Gump In-House CLE Series, October 2016
  • “False Advertising Consumer Class Actions: Best Practices and Latest Developments,” Strafford, November 19, 2015
  • “False Advertising Consumer Class Actions: Best Practices and Latest Developments,” Strafford, July 18, 2013
  • “False Advertising Consumer Class Actions: Latest Developments,” American Bar Association, December 5, 2012
  • “False Advertising Consumer Class Actions: Latest Developments – Best Practices for Bringing and Defending Misleading Advertisement Litigation,”Strafford, September 6, 2012