Moore, Jennifer W.

David Molot is a partner in the firm's Litigation/Controversy Department, and a member of the Business Trial Group. He joined the firm in 1999. Mr. Molot's practice focuses on civil litigation, with a particular emphasis on trial-level litigation. 

Practice

Since joining the firm in October 1999, Mr. Molot has been involved in virtually all aspects of civil litigation, including the commencement of litigation, discovery, pre-trial practice, trial and post-trial proceedings. 

Mr. Molot has assisted in two cases that have gone to trial. He was on the trial team in IGEN International, Inc. v. Roche Diagnostics GmbH, a case where the firm secured a jury verdict for IGEN which allowed it to terminate its licensing agreement with Roche (IGEN's key business objective) and also awarded $505 million in damages. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit sustained the termination right, after which Roche purchased IGEN in a $1.25 billion deal. In addition, Mr. Molot was on the trial team in Grutter v. Bollinger, a case where the firm represented the University of Michigan and its Law School in the historic lawsuits challenging their consideration of race in admissions. 

Mr. Molot also has drafted briefs for cases in the US Supreme Court, the US Courts of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, the 6th Circuit and the 8th Circuit, as well as motions and briefs in state and federal courts across the country. 

Recent Highlights

• Currently representing a financial institution in securities litigation in federal district court
• Successfully resolved trade secret litigation on behalf of a major international retailer concerning one of its consumer products 
• Won summary judgment in two different products liability cases on behalf of an international pharmaceutical company in litigation matters involving oral and injected polio vaccines
• Successfully resolved a multi-million dollar commercial litigation involving a dispute over a government contract
• Represented an international pharmaceutical company in the successful defense of a consumer class action claiming fraudulent marketing
• Argued a successful appeal before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in a case where the firm represented the victims of gun violence in the District of Columbia