Administrative & Regulatory Litigation

We combine our industry-leading regulatory and government-facing experience with an award-winning Supreme Court and appellate practice to provide a top-of-the-market practice focused on administrative and regulatory litigation in the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit and other courts.

Akin’s regulatory and government-facing experience spans the breadth of the federal government. From health care to international trade, from energy to telecommunications, from tax to labor law, we have no shortage of lawyers and practices lauded year after year in publications such as Chambers, Best Lawyers in America, and U.S. News & World Report.

The interdisciplinary team is well situated to blend that broad array of regulatory experience with a nationally renowned appellate practice, which Corporate Counsel recently ranked as one of the top three nationwide. Our appellate practice has been a mainstay on The National Law Journal’s “Appellate Hot List,” consistently listed by Chambers and Legal 500 as a leader in the field, and recognized nationally in the U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers rankings of America’s Best Law Firms.

We regularly lead representations in the district courts, courts of appeals and the Supreme Court on the most cutting-edge administrative law issues that clients face today—often in closely watched, precedent-setting cases. Our team integrates comprehensive knowledge of industries and the government entities that regulate them with top-flight appellate advocacy skills to collaborate in front of both agencies and the courts. Akin’s depth, breadth and quality of experience in the intricacies of administrative law is such that clients from around the country regularly seek out our lawyers on the most pressing and high-stakes regulatory matters.

Our Team

Leading our Supreme Court and appellate team on regulatory and administrative law matters are Pratik Shah and James Tysse. The team boasts former clerks from the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit, where the vast majority of administrative law litigation takes place.

Pratik has argued 18 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and dozens more in federal courts of appeals across the country (including the D.C. Circuit). He is ranked among the country’s top appellate litigators by a number of leading publications, noted as “practicing before the highest court in the land on some of the most groundbreaking cases of the 21st century” (Washington Business Journal) and recognized as “incredibly intelligent with a total command of appellate issues” (Chambers USA). He has also been elected into the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

As a former Assistant Solicitor General in the U.S. Department of Justice, Pratik has extensive experience litigating cases involving government agencies. Since joining Akin, he has successfully argued two Supreme Court cases raising core administrative law issues: Azar v. Allina Health Services, a case interpreting the Medicare Act’s special notice-and-comment rulemaking provision, and Patchak v. Zinke, a case concerning whether a federal statute requiring federal courts to “promptly dismiss” a pending lawsuit violates the separation of powers. Pratik has also served on the D.C. Circuit’s Advisory Committee on Procedures and was appointed by that court as amicus curiae in a major constitutional challenge to administrative law judges.

James has helped clients prevail in administrative challenges in federal and state courts around the country. He specializes in regulatory challenges at the intersection of international trade and national security, including a number of high-profile cases. James has also represented SpaceX in a challenge to the constitutionality of an administrative proceeding, the American Medical Association in a suit attacking a HHS regulation, the Beer Institute in its successful challenge to a final rule promulgated by the Departments of Treasury and Homeland Security in the Court of International Trade, and Hertz Corporation in obtaining a preliminary injunction in connection with a San Francisco agency’s faulty interpretation of local law.

Partner Julius Chen has litigated numerous administrative law cases, including more than a dozen in the D.C. Circuit alone, relating to notice-and-comment rulemaking, finality of agency action, arbitrary and capricious review, and mandamus relief. One series of appeals resulted in the Federal Aviation Administration granting the first-ever commercial pilots’ medical certifications to insulin-treated diabetics.

Senior Counsel Caroline Wolverton, a veteran of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Federal Programs Branch, has litigated administrative law cases involving a diversity of agencies. Since joining Akin, she has helped health care entities successfully challenge decisions of the Department of Health and Human Services and successfully defended a major transit agency’s denials of petitions for access to agency records.

Administrative Law Litigation

Akin regularly briefs and argues administrative law cases before all levels of the federal judiciary, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Those representations cover the gamut of issues associated with federal government regulation, in terms of both substance and procedure.

Akin’s regulatory appeals have involved the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Internal Revenue Service, the National Labor Relations Board, the Patent and Trademark Office, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. and the Postal Regulatory Commission, among others. We also litigate district court cases brought by or against federal agencies.

In addition to its precedent-setting victory in the Allina case, the practice recently secured on behalf of major industry associations a significant win in the Eastern District of Texas in successfully enjoining a new NLRB rule that would have expanded “joint employer” liability nationwide. Our appellate advocates have also teamed up with their trade colleagues to lead the largest suit in the history of the Court of International Trade, which seeks to hold unlawful the Trump Administration’s Section 301 tariffs against China.

Akin’s appellate lawyers have a wealth of experience in Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional issues that cut across industries and agencies, such as notice-and-comment rulemaking strictures and the Article III doctrines of standing, ripeness and mootness.

Regulatory Advice

Beyond directly participating in administrative law litigation, the appellate team is regularly called upon to assist clients in formulating and presenting arguments to federal agencies. By drafting comments in rulemaking proceedings and meeting with key governmental decision-makers, we are able to pursue a favorable administrative outcome for clients, while also laying groundwork that facilitates an efficient transition to litigation if necessary.

Akin’s lawyers are also adept at providing clients with a deeper understanding of regulatory issues. That advice often entails evaluation of potential appeal outcomes, such as the viability of challenges to agency orders or “regulatory takings” claims under the Fifth Amendment.

Representative Cases

Supreme Court

Azar v. Allina Health Services, 139 S. Ct. 1804 (2019). Secured a 7‑1 victory holding that the federal government violated the Medicare Act’s notice-and-comment rulemaking requirement.
Patchak v. Zinke, 138 S. Ct. 897 (2018). Secured a 6-3 victory upholding constitutionality of legislation requiring a dismissal of case against a tribal client and the Department of the Interior.
Department of Commerce v. New York, 139 S. Ct. 2551 (2019). Represented Norman Y. Mineta, Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality and other amici curiae in a case invalidating the Secretary of Commerce’s decision to include a citizenship question on 2020 census.

Courts of Appeals

Akin currently represents the lead plaintiffs in a pioneering APA lawsuit in the Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit challenging the Trump Administration’s imposition of tariffs on Chinese imports, which, due to thousands of copycat lawsuits, has become the largest action in that court’s history.
Port Arthur Community Action Network v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 22:60556 (5th Cir. 2024). Secured a rare withdrawal of a panel decision overturning a liquefied natural gas facility’s Clean Air Act permit.
Int'l Dark-Sky Ass'n, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 106 F.4th 1206 (D.C. Cir. 2024). Successfully represented SpaceX as intervenor in rebuffing challenge to Starlink satellite launch authorization.
MCR Oil Tools, LLC v. United States Department of Transportation, 110 F.4th 677 (5th Cir. 2024). Successfully represented a U.S. manufacturer in an expedited challenge to an agency order barring the manufacturer from shipping (and thus selling) its flagship tool.
Concert Inv., LLC v. Small Bus. Admin., 100 F.4th 215 (D.C. Cir. 2024). Successfully represented small business in persuading D.C. Circuit to vacate SBA’s denial of pandemic relief funds as a violation of the APA.
Viasat, Inc. v. FCC, 47 F.4th 769 (D.C. Cir. 2022). Successfully intervened on behalf of SpaceX and persuaded the D.C. Circuit to affirm the Federal Communications Commission’s order authorizing SpaceX to fly its satellites at a lower altitude.
Fast Food Workers Committee v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 20-1516 (D.C. Cir. 2022). Secured a significant win for McDonald’s in the D.C. Circuit, putting an end to what the NLRB had described as “the lengthiest and most complex proceeding in Board history.” After six years of litigation over nearly 200 alleged labor violations, the NLRB approved settlements without any admission of “joint employer” liability on the part of McDonald’s. The unions petitioned for review in the D.C. Circuit, alleging that the settlements were unfair and that one of the Board’s members should have recused. After McDonald’s hired Akin to take over on appeal from trial counsel, Akin persuaded the D.C. Circuit to adopt our arguments and affirm in full.
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Debra Haaland, et al., No. 20-5123 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 4, 2022). Secured a win in the D.C. Circuit on behalf of the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi Indians against the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe, which was seeking to take land into trust for gaming purposes.
Fleming v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, No. 17-1246 (D.C. Cir.). Appointed amicus curiae by the D.C. Circuit to defend the constitutionality of a statutory scheme governing removal of administrative law judges.
In re FirstEnergy Solutions Corp., 945 F.3d 431 (6th Cir. 2019). Successfully represented a debtor seeking to reject executory power-purchase agreements without Federal Energy Regulatory Commission veto.
Alvarez Lagos v. Barr, 927 F.3d 236 (4th Cir. 2019). Obtained reversal in part and vacatur in part of decisions by immigration law judge and Board of Immigration Appeals in a petition by a Honduran mother and child seeking asylum on basis of gender and imputed political opinion.
Alcresta Therapeutics, Inc. v. Azar, 755 F. App’x 1 (D.C. Cir. 2018). Secured preliminary injunction directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue billing coding numbers to enable Medicare and private insurers to cover client’s medical device.
Archdiocese of Washington v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 897 F.3d 314 (D.C. Cir. 2018), denied 140 S. Ct. 1198 (2020), and ACLU Foundation v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 303 F. Supp. 3d 11 (D.D.C. 2018). Defeated preliminary injunction motions seeking to override a major transit agency’s advertising decisions on First Amendment grounds.
Yazzie v. EPA, 851 F.3d 960 (9th Cir. 2017), and The Hopi Tribe v. EPA, 851 F.3d 957 (9th Cir. 2017). Successfully defended as intervenor an EPA final rule regulating emissions from Navajo Generation Station.
Cruz v. Sessions, 853 F.3d 122 (4th Cir. 2017). Successful petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order in an appeal clarifying standards for analysis of family-based asylum claims.
Boyd v. Office of Personnel Management, 851 F.3d 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Obtained vacatur of Merit Systems Protection Board order on the grounds that the administrative judge’s decision misapplied the overpayment recovery statute.
Friedman v. FAA, 841 F.3d 537 (D.C. Cir. 2016). Successfully argued that the Federal Aviation Administration’s failure to either issue or deny a first-class medical certificate for a pilot constituted a final agency action that the agency was required to explain on remand.
FiberTower Spectrum Holdings, LLC v. FCC, 782 F.3d 692 (D.C. Cir. 2015). Overturned the Federal Communications Commission’s denial of 689 wireless spectrum licenses as arbitrary and capricious.

Trial Courts

Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 6:23-cv-00553 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 18, 2024). Secured a major victory on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and various other organizations challenging a National Labor Relations Board rule that threatened to expand joint employer liability under the National Labor Relations Act.
Space Expl. Techs., Corp. v. Bell, No. 1:23-CV-00137, 2023 WL 8885128 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 8, 2023). Successfully obtained preliminarily injunction, on APA and constitutional grounds, that halted DOJ administrative action alleging employment discrimination.
National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association et al. v. Black et al., No. 5:21-cv-00071 (N.D. Tex.) Successfully defended against constitutional challenges to the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), brought by various states and private groups.
Tyler Reg'l Hosp., LLC v. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs., 673 F. Supp. 3d 849 (E.D. Tex. 2023). Successfully overturned wrongful denial of COVID-relief payments.
Akin filed the only lawsuit to date (CJE v. Commerce) that has ever challenged a BIS Entity List placement, in the process, developing a creative theory to evade a preclusion-of-judicial-review restriction, and prompting the agency to grant conditional removal from the BIS Entity List shortly after the lawsuit was filed.
Akin has led successful APA lawsuits, and obtained preliminary injunctions against multiple U.S. government agencies over wrongfully denied COVID-relief payments.
Washington v. Department of State, --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2020 WL 1083720 (W.D. Wash. 2020). Following intervention, persuaded the trial court to narrow the scope of injunction of final rules by the Departments of State and Commerce.
National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Treasury, 427 F. Supp. 3d 1362 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2020). Following intervention by Beer Institute, successfully challenged the final rules limiting substitution drawback.
Brown v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 19-02853-BAH (D.D.C. 2020), and Unsuck DC Metro v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, No. 19-cv-1242-CJN (D.D.C. 2020). Defeated challenges to major transit agency’s decisions to withhold records under an information access policy.
Hertz Corp. v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 19-5663 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2020). Obtained a preliminary injunction against a San Francisco agency’s erroneous interpretation of municipal law.