Sara B. Brody

Sara B. Brody, a partner at Sidley Austin LLP, is recognized for her expertise in defending high-stakes securities class actions and derivative actions in state and federal courts across the country.

As co-head of the firm’s securities and shareholder litigation practice and leader of its Northern California litigation practice, Brody has decades of experience representing public companies and their officers and directors, managing complex lawsuits and government investigations, conducting internal investigations and providing counsel on governance and disclosure issues.

One of her notable cases was representing the chair of the special acquisition committee of Oracle’s board of directors.

The case arose from Oracle’s 2016 acquisition of NetSuite, where allegations were made against Oracle founder Larry Ellison and CEO Safra Catz for controlling the transaction approval process. Brody successfully obtained a post-trial dismissal of the SAC Chair Renée James by plaintiffs and vindication by the court, affirming James’ independent action and proper conduct of the SAC.

“The Oracle trial outcome was significant both for the court’s discussion of what constitutes an exemplary acquisition process and also because the plaintiffs’ arguments regarding the independence of the Special Committee Chair were infused with negative gender stereotypes that the court was willing to address and dispose,” Brody said.

Another significant case Brody led was the defense of Nektar Therapeutics and its officers in the In re Nektar Therapeutics Sec. Litigation, 34 F.4th 828 (9th Cir. 2022).

This case involved allegations that Nektar had misleadingly included an “outlier” patient in reporting Phase 1 clinical trial results for an oncology drug. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the securities fraud class action, setting influential precedent in securities litigation involving life sciences companies.

“In the several Nektar cases, we faced the challenge that can happen in securities litigation of facing multiple fronts of dispute (class action, derivative and several different jurisdictions),” Brody said. “This can cause conflicting positions and bleed over into cases but we were able to navigate and in some situations use to our advantage (a dismissal in a securities action supported a dismissal of a related derivative case.)”