Aboutwhy sjkplawyerspracticesInsightsCase StudyNewsLocations
Civil Litigation

Technology Litigation

A software rollout failed, a former engineer took code to a competitor, or a platform is accused of copying a feature. Technology litigation puts systems most people never see in front of judges who are not engineers.

Reviewed

01 GUIDE

Technology Litigation: what usually happens

Claims that tend to travel together

Technology cases often combine claims that would be separate elsewhere: breach of a license or services agreement, trade secret misappropriation, copyright or patent infringement, and sometimes claims about unauthorized computer access. A single dispute between a vendor and a customer, or between a startup and a former partner, can carry several of these at once. Contract terms such as limitations of liability, warranty disclaimers, and governing law clauses frequently decide how much is really at stake. Federal and state courts both hear these matters, and some agreements send them to arbitration. Identifying early which claims are genuinely supported helps keep the case focused.

Handling code, logs, and confidential data

Technical evidence rarely looks like ordinary documents. Source code, version control history, server logs, ticketing systems, and the chat channels engineering teams use can all be relevant, and some of them rotate or delete automatically. A litigation hold should reach those systems and the people who administer them. When code is exchanged, courts commonly use protective orders that limit review to secure computers, restrict printing, and separate outside counsel from in-house staff. Retained technical witnesses review the material and explain it, and choosing someone who can teach a judge clearly matters as much as credentials. Departing employees' devices and accounts may need forensic imaging rather than casual review.

Shaping the case from the first meeting

We begin with the business problem: whether you need conduct stopped, compensation, a return of code or data, or a clean exit from a relationship. Urgent situations, such as a suspected trade secret theft or an outage tied to a vendor dispute, may call for emergency relief, which requires prompt and organized evidence. We review the agreements, the technical facts as your team understands them, and the documents most likely to matter. We also discuss cost, because discovery involving large technical systems can be expensive, and we look for ways to keep it proportional. A clear technical narrative developed early often influences the whole case.

02 ATTORNEYS

Who you would be working with

Attorneys at our New York and Washington, D.C. offices handle matters like this one.

05 HOW WE WORK

Client-centered service across jurisdictions

Global Coordination & Expertise

We deliver coordinated and effective legal services to our clients, utilizing our extensive legal resources and experienced attorneys in our well-integrated global network. Through our Washington D.C. and New York offices, together with our alliance

Multilingual & Cross-Border Communication

Our attorneys are experienced in both domestic and international matters and, with fluency in various languages, provide clear and consistent communication at every stage of your legal process.

Client-Centered Approach

Client service lies at the heart of our operations. From the initial consultation, we prioritize understanding your situation, listening to your goals, and providing regular updates and strategies tailored to your individual case.

Multidisciplinary & Efficient Solutions

Our multidisciplinary approach and established processes enable us to address cross-border challenges with efficiency.

06 OFFICES

Where we meet clients

Consultations are available in person or remotely.

New York

285 Fulton Street, New York, NY 10007
(855) 529-7557

Washington, D.C.

Suite 985, 1717 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006
(855) 529-7557

Los Angeles

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 820, Los Angeles, CA 90067
(424) 561-7557

Attorney Advertising. This page is general information about technology litigation and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on the facts of each matter, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Laws differ by state and change over time.