Daniel Asimow is an experienced trial lawyer whose practice focuses on representing companies in antitrust, copyright, and other complex disputes.
He was named one of the top antitrust lawyers in California by the Daily Journal in each year starting in 2020, as well as recognized previously by the Daily Journal as one of the Top 100 Lawyers overall in California. In 2024 he successfully tried to verdict two cases before juries in the Northern District of California – one for plaintiff and one for defendant. The defense verdict involved antitrust claims asserted by a competing manufacturer concerning exclusivity incentives offered to retailers.
Some of his other recent matters include representation of the Oakland Raiders in antitrust litigation initiated by the City of Oakland concerning the Raiders' relocation to Las Vegas. Dan successfully argued the Raiders' motion to dismiss as well as the appeal in the Ninth Circuit, which culminated in a decision that the City lacked antitrust standing. He was similarly successful in 2015 in a matter for the Golden State Warriors, who were sued for allegedly monopolizing the market for secondary ticketing services for Warriors games. Dan secured a dismissal on the basis of the plaintiff's inadequate market definition.
In the technology space, Daniel was part of a team that secured the dismissal in 2018 of an antitrust case that alleged an unlawful no-poach agreement between two competitors. He has represented technology companies in a wide variety of antitrust matters, as both plaintiff and defendant, including cases alleging monopolization of aftermarkets, unlawful tying (both of products and technologies), exclusive dealing, and price fixing.
In the pharmaceutical space, he represented Bristol-Myers Squibb in a wide-ranging antitrust case that challenged the licensing practices involved in combination antiretroviral therapy. He recently concluded representation of another major pharmaceutical company in the first case within the Ninth Circuit to address the application of the Supreme Court's Actavis decision to reverse payment settlements
His copyright work has involved a variety of different types of claims, including obtaining summary judgment in a “look and feel” software copyright case, upholding on appeal a verdict obtained by the Marvin Gaye estate in a dispute over the copying of Gaye’s iconic song “Got to Give It Up,” and prevailing in an appeal regarding the royalties payable to Eminem’s publisher for digital downloads.
In past years he has tried to verdict cases involving technology licensing, alleged monopolization of the electrical grid, retail price scanning, and the publicity rights of retired Major League Baseball players.
Daniel's pro bono practice includes representation of plaintiffs in Doe v. Noem, in which the Court recently granted a preliminary injunction against the early termination of immigration parole for approximately 450,000 Haitians, Cubans, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans. In 2017 he represented plaintiffs in S.A. v. Trump, in which the District Court entered a preliminary injunction finding that the Trump Administration’s termination of the Obama-era Central American Minors Program was likely unlawful and requiring the Department of Homeland Security to resume processing the travel applications of over 2,700 minors in Central America.
Daniel has substantial additional experience in antitrust, copyright, and trademark litigation, as well as class action, partnership and private client service disputes. He provides antitrust counseling to a variety of clients in different industries and has twice taught the primary introductory antitrust course at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.
Experience
- Bayer Animal Health in two-week jury trial regarding alleged exclusive dealings.
- Individual in malicious prosecution action resulting in US$22 million verdict, including US$10 million of punitive damages.
- Semiconductor manufacturer in two-week arbitration concerning alleged fabrication defects.
- Manufacturer of USB flash drives in multi-week jury trial concerning alleged breach of patent license agreement.
- PG&E in successful defense at trial of a Sherman Act Section 2 alleging monopolization of electrical transmission claim asserted within bankruptcy proceedings.
- Major League Baseball Properties in successfully defended at trial of class action alleging misuse and failure to account for use of retired players’ names and likenesses.
- Kmart in successful defense at trial of unfair competition claim concerning alleged pricing inaccuracies.
Perspectives
Recognition
"Top 100 Lawyers in California" (2011, 2016)
Credentials
Education
- J.D., University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, 1992, Thelen Marrin Prize recipient (first in class)
- A.B., Harvard University, 1988, magna cum laude
Admissions
- California
- All federal courts in California Courts
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Clerkships
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Honorable Jon O. Newman
Activities
-
American Bar Association, Antitrust Section
-
President, Association of Business Trial Lawyers
-
State Bar of California