Jameson Reece Jones

Jameson Jones is an experienced trial and appellate lawyer, representing clients in all stages of high stakes litigation involving commercial issues, products liability, mass torts, and intellectual property. Jameson has spent over a year on trial over the last ten years of practice, examined numerous witnesses, and given opening statements in two confidential arbitrations. Jameson excels at crafting legal strategy and for preparing high-stakes cases for trial.

Among other significant accomplishments, Jameson briefed, argued, and obtained a unanimous favorable decision before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Static Control Components, Inc. in Lexmark International v. Static Control Components (No. 12-873). Recently, Jameson helped spearhead three arbitrations for Align Technology, Inc. (the manufacturer of Invisalign) against Smile Direct Club (SDC). Jameson currently represents United Healthcare in ongoing False Claims Act litigation against the Department of Justice related to Medicare Advantage.

Prior to joining Bartlit Beck in 2009, Jameson clerked for Associate Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court and Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Jameson was elected partner at Bartlit Beck in 2013.

United States Supreme Court Briefing and Argument

Lexmark International v. Static Control Components (No. 12-873)
Briefed, argued, and obtained a unanimous favorable decision before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Static Control Components, Inc. The district court had held that Static Control lacked standing, as a prudential matter, to sue Lexmark for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The Sixth Circuit reversed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Jameson crafted the winning strategy to frame Static Control's position in relation to first principles, rather than any of the regional circuits' tests. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Static Control adequately pleaded a viable false advertising claim against Lexmark, adopted Static Control's suggested zone-of-interests approach, and clarified the law with regard to standing and proximate cause for all federal statutes. The opinion is here. Press reports relating to the case are Bloomberg BNA (Court Struggles With Question of Who Should Have Standing Under Lanham Act), and the American Lawyer (Supreme Court Rookie Scores with Lexmark Ruling).

Representative Matters

United States ex rel. Poehling v. UnitedHealthCare (C.D. Cal.) – Represents UnitedHealthCare in False Claims Act litigation related to United’s Medicare Advantage health plans.

SmileDirectClub v. Align Technology, Inc. – Before hiring Bartlit Beck, SmileDirectClub (“SDC”) won an arbitration against Align (maker of Invisalign®) that required Align to close numerous Invisalign® stores.  In follow-on arbitrations, Jameson helped spearhead Align’s defense and assertion of affirmative claims, resulting in three complete victories for Align:

• Operating Agreement Arbitration – Second chaired arbitration, examining multiple key witnesses and obtaining a complete defense victory for Align. Based on findings by the arbitrator in the Operating Agreement Arbitration, Bartlit Beck represents Align in a case asserting claims against SDC on the ground that SDC lied to consumers about the level of supervision dentists and orthodontists provide to patients in SDC’s business.
• Supply Agreement Arbitration I – Second chaired the arbitration and obtained an award for $63 million in favor of Align. The Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara confirmed that award.
• Supply Agreement Arbitration II – First-chaired Align’s successful defense of SDC’s counterclaim against Align at an arbitration hearing. The Arbitrator issued an award in favor of Align and against SDC.

Sunrise Hospital System v. Sierra Health Services (JAMS 2019)
Trial counsel for UnitedHealthcare's affiliate, Sierra, in an arbitration initiated by HCA Healthcare's affiliate, Sunrise, alleging underpayments for medical services. Case resolved on confidential terms.

Santa Clara County et al. v. NL Industries (District Court for Santa Clara County, California)
Represented NL industries in a public nuisance action related to lead paint, brought on behalf of a number of California municipalities. Briefed and argued the appeal in California's Sixth District Court of Appeal obtaining a substantial reduction in what had been a $1.15 billion judgment. NL subsequently settled its share of the case for $101.67 million.

FDIC & Colonial BancGroup v. PwC (M.D. Ala. 2017-2018)
Defended PwC against Colonial Bank and the FDIC in a suit filed after the collapse of PwC's audit client Colonial Bank. Colonial Bank sought several hundred million dollars in damages. The FDIC sought over $2 billion in actual damages, plus unspecified punitive damages. Following a bench trial on liability, the court ruled for PwC on the entirety of Colonial Bank's claim. The  court ruled against PwC on some of the FDIC's claims and in favor of PwC on others. The court also ruled in favor of PwC on the FDIC's request for punitive damages. Following a bench trial on damages, the court awarded the FDIC $625 million. Before judgment was entered, and while post-trial motions were pending, the parties settled the case for $335 million. One member of the FDIC's board of directors publicly dissented from the settlement because it did not contain an acknowledgment of liability by PwC. 

Liverpool Football Club Litigation (England)
Represented American investor George Gillett, and related entities including Kop Investment LLC, in litigation arising out of the sale of the Liverpool Football Club, one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world.

Confidential Arbitration
Co-lead trial counsel for defendant in a confidential damages-only arbitration stemming from a product liability settlement.

Imprelis® Litigation (E.D. Pa.)
National counsel for DuPont in product liability litigation, including putative class actions pending in an MDL in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging damage caused by DuPont's Imprelis® herbicide.

Meins v. Bayer, et al. (Arkansas Circuit Court, Arkansas Cty.)
Represented Bayer in a case against Riceland Foods, Inc. in a four-week trial concerning the presence of genetically modified rice in the U.S. long-grain rice supply.

Briggs v. Bayer CropScience LP (Arkansas District Court, Jefferson Cty.)
Represented Bayer in case brought by large Jefferson County rice farmer. Plaintiff's counsel engaged in improper publicity on eve of jury selection and trial team obtained continuance three days before trial.

Sims, et al v. Bayer CropScience LP, et al. (Arkansas Circuit Court, Desha Cty.)
Represented Bayer in case brought by six Desha County rice farmers. Jury awarded $946,000, only 7% of plaintiffs' $14,000,000 in requested damages and just $70,000 more than defendants' expert testimony regarding damages. Jury unanimously rejected punitive damages.

In re: Genetically Modified Rice Litigation-MDL Bellwether Trial (E.D. Mo.)
Represented Bayer for second MDL bellwether trial in St. Louis. Two Missouri rice farmers prevailed, but jury awarded less than requested and no punitive damages.