James R. Sigel 

James R. Sigel is a partner and an appellate specialist at Morrison Foerster. He has argued more than 20 times before the U.S. Supreme Court, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, four other circuits and California’s appellate courts.

He joined the firm in 2015 after graduating from Harvard Law School and clerking for Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt at the 9th Circuit, Justice Goodwin H. Liu at the state Supreme Court, Judge David S. Tatel at the District of Columbia Circuit and Justice Sonia M. Sotomayor at the U.S. Supreme Court.

“That was a busy but great few years. I learned a lot,” Sigel said. “At the end, I was convinced that appellate work was what I wanted to do. You get to be a generalist.”

Indeed, his appellate work has covered many areas of law, including class actions, securities, antitrust, contracts, false advertising and environmental regulation.

He’s currently interested in the gun rights issue, having filed amicus briefs for Gov. Gavin Newsom before the U.S. Supreme Court at the cert and merits stages of a major case that will interpret the 2022 Bruen decision in the context of laws designed to protect domestic violence victims.

The 5th Circuit ruled that a federal ban on the possession of firearms by domestic violence perpetrators violated a Texas man’s constitutional rights. “This is an extremely important issue, and we explained why the 5th Circuit got it wrong,” Sigel said. U.S. v. Rahimi, 22-915 (U.S. S. Ct., cert granted June 30, 2023).

In a case over the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act’s effect on state court cases, Sigel used a complex strategy to get the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court. He teed up the matter by leading an appeal for client Pivotal Software, Inc. through the California appellate courts on the question of whether the PLSRA’s discovery-stay provision applies to federal securities suits in state courts.

“We had good arguments: could Congress dictate state court procedures?” Sigel said. “But how to get that legal issue up there was the problem.” Once the California Supreme Court declined to hear it, the path was open for U.S. Supreme Court review. Sigel and the appellate team persuaded the high court to grant cert and filed an opening brief. At that point, the other side settled, ending the case and leaving the issue unresolved. Pivotal Software, Inc. v. Superior Court of California, 20-1541 (U.S. S. Ct., dismissed Feb. 21, 2023).

The job suits Sigel. “I spend a lot of time reading cases and writing briefs,” he said. “It’s what I love to do. It’s a good gig.”

—John Roemer