Header graphic for print
Class Defense Blog Cutting-Edge Issues in Class Action Law and Policy

Archis A. Parasharami

Archis A. Parasharami

Archis A. Parasharami, a litigation partner in Mayer Brown's Washington DC office, is a co-chair of the firm's Consumer Litigation & Class Actions practice, recently named by Law360 as one of the top five class action groups of the year. He also is a member of the firm's Supreme Court & Appellate practice.

Archis routinely defends businesses in class action litigation in federal and state courts around the country. He brings substantial experience to all aspects of complex litigation and class actions, with a particular focus on strategy issues, multidistrict litigation, and critical motions seeking the dismissal of class actions or opposing class certification. He also has helped businesses achieve settlements on highly favorable terms in significant class actions. Archis frequently speaks on developments in the class action arena, and has been quoted on a number of occasions in the National Law Journal, Corporate Counsel, and the Wall Street Journal Law Blog.

Read Archis' full bio.

Posts by Archis A. Parasharami

Supreme Court Issues Narrow Decision Declining to Overturn Arbitrator’s Ruling that Silent Arbitration Clause Permits Class Arbitration

By Archis A. Parasharami and Kevin Ranlett on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

We’ve previously blogged about the Supreme Court’s grant of review and argument in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter.  Today, the Supreme Court issued its decision (pdf).  In a narrowly-written ruling, the  Court held that courts lack authority under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to vacate an arbitral award authorizing class arbitration when when (1) the… Continue Reading

Supreme Court To Decide Whether Parens Patriae Suits Can Be Removed Under Class Action Fairness Act

By Archis A. Parasharami and Kevin Ranlett on Posted in Class Action Trends, U.S. Supreme Court

We’ve blogged before about whether parens patriae lawsuits filed by state attorneys’ general to recover money on behalf of state citizens can be removed under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). (CAFA authorizes defendants to remove certain “mass actions” involving “monetary relief claims of 100 or more persons” from state court to federal court. 28… Continue Reading

FCC Addresses Vicarious Liability Under Telephone Consumer Protection Act

By Kevin Ranlett and Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Motions Practice

Plaintiffs in some TCPA class actions have taken the position that companies are strictly liable for any violation of the TCPA by third parties that make calls or send faxes on the companies’ behalf (such as third-party marketers or debt collectors).  The FCC, however, has just issued a declaratory ruling that appears to reject that… Continue Reading

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Files Amicus Brief On Arbitration Issues In Key California Supreme Court Case

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration

In the wake of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, the California Supreme Court granted review in three cases involving significant arbitration issues, including key questions about whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California law concerning the enforceability of arbitration agreements. My colleagues and I have filed amicus briefs on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce… Continue Reading

Webinar on Arbitration And Class Actions Two Years After Concepcion

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

Last Saturday marked the two-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, a decision that has had an enormous impact on the world of class-action litigation.  To date, Concepcion has been cited in over 650 decisions, and (for the most part) has been applied broadly to enforce agreements to arbitrate… Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Narrows California Exception To Arbitration Agreements, But Puts Off Deciding Whether FAA Preempts The Exception Altogether

By Andrew J. Pincus and Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration

Earlier today, the Ninth Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Kilgore v. KeyBank, N.A. The court had granted en banc review to decide whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s so-called “Broughton/Cruz” rule, which declares that claims for “public” injunctive relief under California consumer protection statutes are unsuitable for, and exempt from, arbitration. As… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Reverses Certification of Antitrust Class Action Where Class Failed To Prove That Damages Could Be Determined On A Classwide Basis

By Archis A. Parasharami and Kevin Ranlett on Posted in Antitrust, Class Certification, Predominance, U.S. Supreme Court

An important and recurring issue in class actions is whether a district court must consider particular merits issues when deciding whether to certify a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Today, in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend (pdf), No. 11-864, the Supreme Court reversed the certification of an antitrust class action because the district court… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Hears Argument In Class Arbitration Case, Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court heard oral argument earlier today in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, No. 12-135, on whether the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) allows an arbitrator to interpret an arbitration agreement that does not affirmatively authorize class arbitration to permit use of that procedure. For some background on Oxford, please see our prior blog… Continue Reading

Second Circuit Reverses Denial Of Individual Arbitration In Title VII Class Action

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, Employment

Since Concepcion, the plaintiffs’ bar has been exhorting courts to recognize exceptions to its holding that courts may not refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement on the ground that it precludes class actions.  In the employment context, the plaintiffs’ bar thought that it had a winner with Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs,  in which a magistrate… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rejects Plaintiffs’ Efforts To Avoid Federal Jurisdiction By “Stipulating” To Limit Class Recoveries To Under $5 Million

By Archis A. Parasharami and Brian Wong on Posted in U.S. Supreme Court

Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, No. 11-1450, that should make it a lot harder for plaintiffs and their counsel to avoid federal-court jurisdiction over significant class actions. The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 authorizes the removal of class actions to federal court when,… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Appears Poised To Reject Second Circuit’s Articulation of “Effective Vindication Of Federal Statutory Rights” Defense For Avoiding Class Arbitration Waivers

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

Yesterday, my colleagues and I attended oral arguments before the Supreme Court in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12-133, in which we submitted an amicus brief on behalf of business groups.   As readers of the blog know, the issue in American Express is whether plaintiffs may avoid their agreements to arbitrate… Continue Reading

California Supreme Court Grants Review In Employment Arbitration Case

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, Employment

The California Supreme Court granted review last week in Franco v. Arakelian Enterprises Inc., No. S207660, in which the California Court of Appeal had refused to enforce an agreement to arbitrate on an individual basis in the context of a wage-and-hour class action. For more on Franco, please see our prior post. The California Supreme… Continue Reading

Federal Court Grants Motion to Strike Class Allegations in TCPA Case

By Archis A. Parasharami and Kevin Ranlett on Posted in Ascertainability, Class Certification, Motions Practice

We’re big fans of filing an early motion to strike class allegations when it’s apparent from the pleadings that the class definition is fatally flawed. Why should a defendant be forced to submit to the wringer of class discovery before taking a swing at defeating class certification? A recent case involving Office Depot illustrates the… Continue Reading

CAFA Showdown in the Supreme Court: Today’s Oral Argument In Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in U.S. Supreme Court

This morning I attended the oral argument before the Supreme Court in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, the first major case in which the Court will address the provisions of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA).   For class-action lawyers on both sides, this case has been seven years in the making.   From… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Grants Review in Class Arbitration Case, Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter

By Archis A. Parasharami and Christos Papapetrou on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

Two years ago, the Supreme Court held “that a party may not be compelled under the [Federal Arbitration Act] to submit to class arbitration unless there is a contractual basis for concluding that the party agreed to do so.” Stolt-Nielsen v. AnimalFeeds International Corp., 130 S. Ct. 1758, 1775 (2010) (emphasis in original). But the… Continue Reading

Washington State Appellate Court’s Ruling Appears To Contravene Federal Arbitration Law

By Archis A. Parasharami and Brian Wong on Posted in Arbitration

The Supreme Court’s unanimous summary reversal in Nitro-Lift last week sends a strong message that state courts must adhere to the Federal Arbitration Act—a legal principle that is important to businesses seeking to enforce their contractual arbitration rights when plaintiffs file non-removable class actions in state court. Just as importantly, it confirms that the Court… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Summarily Reverses State Court For Failure To Follow High Court’s Arbitration Precedents

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

We usually don’t report on Supreme Court cases that don’t involve class action issues. That said, regular readers of the blog know that the enforceability of arbitration agreements has become a critical issue in class action defense. For that reason, we wanted to apprise you of the Supreme Court’s latest arbitration decision in Nitro-Lift Technologies,… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in American Express Arbitration Case

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration, U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has just granted certiorari in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12-133.   Earlier today, my colleague Andy Pincus previewed the issue presented to the Court, which is (in a nutshell) whether plaintiffs may avoid their agreements to arbitrate on an individual rather than class-wide basis by contending that they cannot… Continue Reading

Chamber of Commerce Files Amicus Brief In Critical Ninth Circuit Case Explaining Why Plaintiffs Should Not Be Permitted To Use “Public Injunction” Claims As An End-Run Around Their Arbitration Agreements

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration

As we previously reported, the Ninth Circuit granted rehearing en banc in Kilgore v. KeyBank, NA, to determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a California public-policy rule that declares claims for so-called “public injunctive relief” off-limits to arbitration. On October 26, 2012, my colleagues and I, working with the National Chamber Litigation Center, filed… Continue Reading

Should State Attorneys General Be Able To Deputize Plaintiffs’ Lawyers On A Contingent-Fee Basis?

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Class Action Trends

For a variety of reasons, there are situations when plaintiffs’ lawyers are unable to pursue private class actions on their own. As a result, some plaintiffs’ lawyers have come up with a substitute business model: Convince state attorneys general to hire them on a contingent-fee basis to bring claims on behalf of a state—either in… Continue Reading

Comcast v. Behrend Remains Live: District Court Thwarts Plaintiffs’ Effort To Moot Case By Invoking Unconsummated Settlement

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Class Action Settlements, Class Certification, U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, No. 11-864, on November 5. In a nutshell, the issue is whether a federal district court must resolve challenges to an expert witness’s testimony concerning whether damages can be awarded on a class-wide basis before deciding whether to certify a class. Please… Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Grants Rehearing En Banc In Kilgore v. KeyBank To Determine Whether California May Exempt Claims For “Public” Injunctions From Arbitration

By Archis A. Parasharami on Posted in Arbitration

In an effort to avoid the enforcement of arbitration agreements after AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the plaintiffs’ bar has sought to invoke provisions of California’s Unfair Competition Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act that allow for consumers to pursue claims for injunctive relief on behalf of the “general public.” They point to two pre-Concepcion decisions… Continue Reading