We have a strong track record in obtaining early dismissal, compelling individual arbitration, defeating class certification, or obtaining summary judgment. Our experience in contesting plaintiffs’ ability to sue on a class-wide basis—especially at the outset of a case—can be a game-changer, reducing the leverage that plaintiffs’ lawyers have over a company and narrowing the scope, costs, and burdens of discovery. Our lawyers have also been at the forefront of protecting companies against a modern variation on the abusive class action—threatened mass-arbitration filings designed to use the amount and timing of arbitration fees to coerce settlements without regard to the merits of the claims.

Defending against class action and aggregate litigation requires a legal team that offers strategic vision and tactical mastery. We excel at both, in part because we effectively pair the elite litigation skills of our trial lawyers with the nationally recognized strategic and brief-writing capabilities of the members of our Supreme Court & Appellate and other practices. By drawing upon Mayer Brown’s deep talent pool, we are able to help our clients aggressively challenge and efficiently litigate class actions and other aggregate litigation from day one. Our team includes former regulators, government officials, and in-house counsel, allowing Mayer Brown to offer clients unique perspectives on the defense of class actions and other aggregate litigation matters.

Mayer Brown has been at the forefront of developing the law on cutting-edge class action issues. The firm has unparalleled experience in helping clients implement and enforce arbitration programs as an alternative to judicial resolution of disputes, including the firm’s path-breaking victory before the US Supreme Court in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion—a decision that “helped change the class action landscape” (American Lawyer) and represented a “monumental victory” for businesses (Forbes). The firm’s class-action and appellate lawyers also obtained a landmark Supreme Court victory in the Article III standing case of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, which Law360 hailed as a “potent defensive tool” for businesses.

Mayer Brown also represents companies defending claims in the rapidly developing UK class action regimes, including a significant environmental damages class action in the English High Court, and previously in antitrust group litigation before the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal.

Mayer Brown is one of the leading firms in defending businesses against class actions. We were recognized as a “Distinguished” litigation firm (among the top 4% of all firms) for our prowess in “Class Action Litigation” in BTI’s Litigation Outlook 2025. The firm was also named a “Class Action Powerhouse” by BTI Litigation Outlook 2020. We were recognized as “Class Action Group of the Year” by Law360 in 2016, 2017 and 2022. We have also been ranked by Chambers USA in the Financial Services (Consumer Litigation) category for 2021-2024.

Mayer Brown lawyers have achieved international recognition as thought leaders. In addition to routinely speaking on issues affecting class actions and aggregate litigation, Mayer Brown’s team maintains the Class Defense blog, in which the firm’s lawyers provide up-to-date commentary and insights on recent developments.

MERS Litigation: Represented a global financial institution in dozens of class actions brought by counties and municipalities around the country alleging that the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) deprived them of fees when interests in mortgage loans were transferred without recording new assignments. Courts dismissed nearly all of these cases on motions to dismiss.

Consumer Class Actions: Convinced the Ninth Circuit to reverse a district court’s decision denying our client, a telecommunications company, motion to compel arbitration in a putative class action. The Ninth Circuit agreed with our position that the requested injunction for the benefit of the company’s customers did not qualify as a so-called “public injunction” under California law, and therefore did not provide the plaintiff with a basis for avoiding enforcement of his arbitration agreement.

Preemption Challenge to California Anti-Arbitration Statute: Obtained a permanent injunction against enforcement of a California statute, Assembly 51, that would have effectively banned workplace arbitration agreements in California and opened the door to widespread class and collective actions. On behalf of business association advocacy groups, we obtained a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the California law. We then obtained affirmance of that injunction in the Ninth Circuit, which resulted in the State of California stipulating to a permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of the statute.

ERISA Class Action Trial: Our trial litigators obtained a complete victory on behalf of a university in a first-of-its-kind jury trial in an ERISA class action. After a five-week trial, the jury found no loss to the plan on one claim, and no breach by the university as to the other claims. As a result, the plaintiffs—who originally sought more than half a billion dollars, and who asked in their closing for over $130 million from the jury—were awarded zero dollars in damages.

Alien Tort Statute Litigation: Successfully represented a multinational food corporation throughout a 16-year Alien Tort Statute class action involving multiple dismissals and trips to the courts of appeals. We briefed the case for our client in the US Supreme Court, which agreed with our position that the plaintiffs improperly sought extraterritorial application of the statute..

Environmental Class Action: Served as lead appellate counsel for a manufacturer of specialty materials in a class action arising out of the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey. The Fifth Circuit vacated the class certification order, and, on remand, the district court rejected plaintiffs’ renewed attempt to certify a damages class.

Securities Class Action: Represented a telecommunications company and certain of its officers and directors in federal securities and derivative actions and state derivative actions in connection with the company’s multi-billion dollar acquisition of another telecommunication company’s accounts in California, Texas and Florida. We obtained dismissal of the putative class action complaint and resolved the matter while that decision was on appeal to the Second Circuit.

TCPA/Privacy Class Actions: Secured multiple appellate and trial court victories for a television services company in a TCPA class action. The Eleventh Circuit vacated the class certification order because individualized issues of Article III standing posed a powerful problem for certification of one of the proposed damages classes. In a subsequent appeal, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that newly added privacy claims brought by another named plaintiff were subject to arbitration. After the Eleventh Circuit’s rulings, the district court granted our client summary judgment on the remaining claim, ruling that the company was not vicariously liable for the calls at issue.

Paycheck Protection Program Class Actions: Secured an industry-leading victory for several global financial institutions on behalf of our clients. The heart of the dispute was whether CPA firms and other agents who allegedly assisted business borrowers with loan applications under the CARES Act’s Paycheck Protection Program are statutorily entitled to agent fees from lenders. In the class action, consolidated with five other class actions, the federal court in Manhattan granted the motions to dismiss and agreed with our position that the statute does not entitle agents to agent fees. We secured a similar win for our client in another PPP agent fee class action in California.

Internet Service Litigation: Compelled individual arbitration of claims in a putative class action against a telecommunications subsidiary of a broadband communications company, in a putative class action challenging the speed and reliability of the subsidiary’s internet service in California. The court agreed with the company’s arguments across the board and rejected all of the plaintiffs’ challenges to the formation and enforcement of his arbitration agreement.

Cryptocurrency Data Breach Litigation: Successfully compelled individual arbitration of the claims against our client, a major cryptocurrency exchange, in a putative class action involving a data incident arising out of the compromise of another party’s security systems and administrative controls.

TCPA Class Action: Obtained dismissal of a putative class action against a telecommunications company alleging a violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. In affirming the dismissal, the Seventh Circuit agreed with our position that the statute’s definition of an “autodialer” does not apply to equipment that automatically dials from a supplied list of telephone numbers.

ERISA Severance Class Action: Obtained summary judgment in favor of an aerospace and defense technology company in a nationwide putative class action challenging the company’s discretion to award or deny severance to terminated employees. After nine years of hard-fought litigation before three federal judges and involving novel questions of law, our litigators persuaded the court that exercising discretion under the terms of the severance plan did not violate ERISA.

Insurer TCPA Class Action: Represented a global life insurance company in a proposed nationwide class action relating to text messages sent in purported violation of the TCPA. After a district court dismissed the claims and the plaintiff appealed, the company reached a class settlement on highly favorable terms.

Privacy Class Action For Internet Service Provider: Defeated class certification in a putative class action against a cable and internet provider challenging the practice of providing wireless routers free of charge that broadcast a separate wireless network accessible to other subscribers. After obtaining dismissal of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claims at the pleadings stage, we successfully opposed the plaintiff’s motion for class certification on the remaining state-law claims.

Automotive Products Liability Class Action: Obtained dismissal for a multinational automotive manufacturer in a putative class action. A major Japanese industrial company announced that it had provided false data to its automaker customers about whether the metal it sold met specifications, and the plaintiffs alleged that the potential presence of the metal affected the performance or safety of their vehicles. The court granted our motion to dismiss, agreeing with our position that the claims against our client were speculative and at best premature.

Shareholder Class Action: Prevailed on behalf of former directors of an energy company in a putative shareholder class action in the Delaware Court of Chancery challenging a $13 billion merger with a multinational energy company. The court granted our motion to dismiss and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Environmental Damages Class Action: Representing a UK-incorporated international agricultural investment company in defending a significant environmental damages claim involving complex issues of Brazilian shareholder liability law.

Follow-on Antitrust Litigation: Secured a favorable settlement for a multinational investment bank in defending follow-on litigation brought by investors arising from a European Commission cartel decision. The litigation involved multiple parallel US/UK proceedings and operating as part of a joint defense group with several other banks.