Neel Chatterjee

Neel Chatterjee is well known as a litigator in the areas of software, semiconductors, electronics and internet technology. Lately, however, the scope of his practice has expanded.

“Just the amount of innovation occurring and … the types of technology I’m dealing with are way broader than anything I’ve dealt with before,” he said. It has been “very, very interesting, and it’s been a big change.”

In addition to his usual fare, he now has cases involving life sciences, 3D printing and materials science, basketball data analytics and mattresses and sheets — which, as he has noted, turns out to be extremely litigious business.

Even some of his software and technology matters are different. Chatterjee said he is seeing a large uptick in cases and clients involving apps sitting on top of other apps to act as agents for users. For instance, he is working with a company called Para Inc. that offers an app to help gig-economy drivers determine which transportation service will be most lucrative for them at any one time and place.

“I’ve been helping them avoid litigation and develop their business model,” he said.

He is representing two similar companies in litigation. In one, he represents a company with technology that allows drivers to make their cars’ computer information easily available directly to auto shops and insurers. Volkswagen Group of America Inc. v. Smartcar Inc., 5:21-cv-04895 (N.D. Cal., filed June 25, 2021).

In the other, he represents a company whose app helps landlords pay utility bills and charge tenants. ACI Payments Inc. v. Conservice LLC, 1:21-cv-00084 (D. Utah, filed June 4, 2021).

Chatterjee said he is advising at least 15 such companies in fields from fintech to the gig economy.

“I’m handling a whole bunch of matters that are all flavors of this, where a user or customer wants to make use of data that is theirs and whoever houses the data doesn’t want to let them do it for one reason or another,” he said.

He’d had such clients in the past, but only one or two a year. “There’s a clear uptick and a clear level of activity in this space. … And the law hasn’t caught up to it.”

Chatterjee also has a busy pro bono practice. In one case close to his heart, he is handling litigation against the city of Gilroy to obtain bodycam footage of police officers’ treatment of the homeless. His client obtained much of what it wanted, but “the judge said the city does not have a duty to preserve documents during the pendency of a Public Records Act request — which sort of guts the rule.”

That issue is now on appeal. Law Foundation of Silicon Valley v. City of Gilroy, H049554 (Cal. App., 6th Dist., filed Nov. 15, 2021).

— Don DeBenedictis