Leonid Grinberg

Leonid Grinberg is an associate who litigates complex matters for plaintiffs and defendants from the filing of a complaint through appeal.  He has litigated at every level of the judicial system, in state and federal courts, from trial courts to the U.S. Supreme Court.  His practice focuses on general commercial litigation as well as appellate litigation and white collar matters.

Mr. Grinberg is a skilled researcher, writer, and advocate.  He contributes to every phase of the case – performing in-depth legal and factual research, developing case strategy, drafting key motions, taking and defending depositions, and preparing diligently for argument.

Mr. Grinberg’s trial-level cases have involved dozens of fact and expert witnesses, hundreds of thousands of documents, and novel legal issues.  In those high-stakes matters, he has argued dispositive and discovery motions, deposed and defended fact and expert witnesses, and drafted dispositive, discovery, evidentiary, and procedural motions.

Mr. Grinberg has briefed federal appeals before the First, Second, Ninth, and Federal Circuits, involving voluminous records and complex legal issues.  He also assisted in drafting petitions for certiorari and merits briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Before joining MoloLamken, Mr. Grinberg clerked for the Honorable Frederic Block of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.  He relies on that experience to help focus cases on the issues that judges actually care about, which helps to streamline litigation and avoid tangential disputes.

Prior to law school, Mr. Grinberg worked as a software engineer for a major media company.  He holds an S.B. in Computer Science and Engineering from the Massachusetts of Technology.  His technical expertise complements his legal skills and frequently allows him to bring a fresh perspective to cases involving complex technology.

Mr. Grinberg is a native Russian speaker.

Representative Matters

• Non-profit advocacy organization in the United States Supreme Court, addressing the extraterritorial application of a state health-and-safety regulation
• Individuals employed by a target of a Department of Justice investigation in connection with allegations of wire fraud and identity theft
• Law firms objecting to multidistrict litigation common-benefit fee assessments in district court and the Ninth Circuit
• International personal-protective-equipment manufacturer pursuing utility and design patent infringement claims
• American Indian nation pursuing state-law claims against e-cigarette manufacturers, distributors, and retailers
• Technology companies appealing adverse district court orders in the Federal Circuit
• Advertisers pursuing class action claims against a major social media company
• Software company pursuing patent infringement claims

• Financial institutions pursuing residential mortgage-backed securities “putback” suits against securitization sponsors

• Foreign-owned gas utility defending against an arbitration enforcement action in the Second Circuit

• Fortune 50 company as amicus curiae at the merits stage in the United States Supreme Court, addressing the application of copyright’s fair use doctrine to computer software

• Non-profit advocacy organizations as amici curiae in the First Circuit, arguing on behalf of a parent in the “Varsity Blues” investigation

• Law professors as amici curiae at the certiorari stage in the United States Supreme Court, arguing for a reexamination of the “plain view” exception

• Incarcerated individual pursuing section 1983 claims against a municipality and other responsible individuals

Publications

• Can Courts Exercise Jurisdiction Over Out-of-State Class Members?, National Law Journal (July 24, 2020) (with Jessica Ortiz)

• Courts Face Controversy Over Uninjured Antitrust Class Members, National Law Journal (Feb. 27, 2020) (with Lauren Weinstein)

• Note, End-to-End Authentication: A First Amendment Hook to the Encryption Debate, 74 N.Y.U. Ann. Surv. Am. L. 173 (2018)