Quinn Emanuel Gets $3 Million Sanction in Drug Advertising Case

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP has been ordered to pay nearly $3 million in sanctions for the actions of several of its attorneys in a long-running pharmaceutical advertising case, a federal judge said.

Two Quinn Emanuel partners and an associate must also receive an eight-hour legal ethics course that the firm must develop, Judge Edward M. Chen of the US District Court for the Northern District of California said Tuesday.

The conduct of the firm and several of its lawyers during its representation of Natera Inc. “implicates a culture of lawyering that is deeply disturbing,” Chen said in adopting a special master’s recommendation. “At virtually every juncture in this misadventure, these attorneys turned a blind eye to the truth, deliberately failed to exercise diligence, violated their duties of candor to the Court, and then attempted to justify it—without basis.”

The underlying case concerns Guardant Health’s liquid biopsy cancer assay for early-stage colorectal cancer patients, and its allegations that Natera engaged in a campaign of “false and misleading advertising” directed at the product.

The firm and its “entire litigation team” allegedly engaged in a pattern of conduct that included propagating misleading statements from an expert witness, Chen said.

Besides nearly $3 million in compensatory damages to Guardant, the firm must also pay a punitive fine of $100,000, and partners Andrew Bramhall and Brian Cannon—both located in the firm’s Silicon Valley office—must pay additional sanctions of up to $58,000. Associate Elle Wang, of the San Francisco office, was ordered to pay $28,000. Each of the three also must take the ethics course.

Two other Quinn Emanuel lawyers in Silicon Valley, imanaging partner Victoria Maroulis and partner Margaret Shyr, may also be on the hook for sanctions, but Chen deferred making a recommendation in their cases.

The punitive sanction against the firm is warranted in part because punitive damages can be awarded by a jury “upon a clear and convincing finding. It is difficult to see why this standard would not apply here,” the judge said.

The actions in the case are “particularly damaging to younger associates, who take their cues and learn their practice from partners who fail to model ethical behavior, creating a vicious cycle,” Chen said.

“We are deeply disappointed by the conduct described in the judge’s Order. The lawyers involved have apologized to Judge Chen, and the Firm has joined in that apology,” a Quinn Emanuel spokesperson said.

The firm “is instituting concrete measures to confirm and reiterate our ethical imperatives,” the spokesperson said. Among these measures are having a firm executive committee member visit each office in person “to emphasize the Firm’s rejection of the conduct that Judge Chen described,” and hire an additional lawyer to the general counsel’s staff “with the specific and sole charter to advise lawyers who face questions about disclosures to the Court.”

Neither Bramhall, Cannon, nor Wang immediately responded to a request for comment.

Keller Anderle Scolnick LLP, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling US LLP, and Jones Day represent Guardant Health. Quinn Emanuel represents itself. Natera is also represented by Winston & Strawn, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, and King & Spalding LLP.

The case is Guardant Health Inc. v. Natera Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 3:21-cv-04062, order 5/19/26.