John “Jay” Jurata is a leading first-chair antitrust trial lawyer with more than two decades of experience representing clients in complex litigation, government investigations relating to monopolization and abuse of dominance, and mergers and acquisitions. A former surface warfare officer in the U.S. Navy, Mr. Jurata is uniquely skilled at handling clients’ most high-stakes matters. His practice encompasses both U.S. and international competition law, with a focus on digital platforms and issues at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property. Mr. Jurata has represented many key players in the technology industry, including Microsoft Corporation, Sonos, Sharp Corporation, LG Corp and Panasonic Holdings Corporation.

Some of Mr. Jurata’s key matters include leading the defense team for Zillow Group Inc. in an ongoing lawsuit filed by REX relating to the display of broker listing information, as well as representing Microsoft, Sonos and others in their roles as interested parties in the Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit against Google. In addition, he represents Microsoft on a variety of merger control, antitrust investigation and private litigation matters.

Mr. Jurata also has a long history of representing both licensors and licensees in disputes concerning standards-essential patents. Such successes include: acting for Sharp in a standards-essential patent licensing arbitration against InterDigital Corporation that sought US$390 million in damages; obtaining the dismissal of a lawsuit alleging that iBiquity charged excessive royalties for its standards-essential patent portfolio; and winning a breach of contract lawsuit against an iBiquity patent licensee regarding that same portfolio.

Mr. Jurata is recognized as a leading antitrust litigator by Chambers USA and The Legal 500 US.

  • Government investigations/litigation

    • Microsoft, Sonos and others in their role as interested parties in the Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit against Google.
    • Microsoft, as lead U.S. outside counsel, in resolving the Korea Fair Trade Commission’s (KFTC) opposition to Microsoft's US$7.2 billion purchase of Nokia's devices and services business. Mr. Jurata was responsible for the overall strategy in responding to the investigation, including preparing Microsoft's written submission to the KFTC, participating in oral arguments before the agency and developing the consent decree strategy that ultimately resolved the dispute.
    • Emerging start-up companies in advocating the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to stop Google from allegedly manipulating its search ranking results to block potential competition to its search advertising monopoly.
    • Microsoft in responding to allegations by Google that Nokia's 2011 sale of patents to a non-practicing entity violates EU competition law.
    • Microsoft in securing unconditional clearance, through the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, of its US$1.2 billion acquisition of Yammer, Inc., which adds Yammer's popular social networking tool for businesses to Microsoft's popular line of productivity software.
    • The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) in persuading the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division and Florida AG office to open a two-year antitrust investigation into IBM's business practices involving mainframe computing. 
    • TurboHercules SAS in convincing the EU Directorate General for Competition to initiate a formal abuse of dominance investigation into IBM's conduct in mainframe computing.
    • A U.S. importer seeking that the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division and U.S. Federal Trade Commission stop the alleged manipulation of Department of Commerce antidumping procedures by certain companies to disadvantage competitors.
    • Microsoft in responding to claims that browsing functionality as part of Windows and productivity software product design choices violated EU competition law. 
    • GPX International Tire Corp. in seeking a preliminary injunction from the U.S. Court of International Trade to stay a ruling by the U.S. International Trade Commission ordering antidumping counter duties for certain imported products.
    • Western Refining, Inc. in successfully preventing the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's request for a preliminary injunction to block Western's US$1.3 billion acquisition of Giant Industries, as well as the FTC's emergency requests for an injunction pending appeal from the district court and the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
    • Microsoft in responding to claims that including media player functionality as part of Windows violated Korean competition law.
    • Microsoft in responding to claims that including media player functionality as part of Windows violated Japanese competition law.

    Private litigation

    • Zillow in an alleged Section 1 antitrust conspiracy lawsuit filed by REX Real Estate.
    • ACV Auctions in an alleged group boycott lawsuit against Manheim, ADESA and other physical auctions and associated entities in the Western District of New York.
    • ACV Auctions in dismissing an alleged price fixing conspiracy lawsuit in the Western District of New York.
    • Carnival Corporation in alleged sham litigation antitrust counterclaims in the Southern District of Florida.
    • FUJIFILM in sham litigation antitrust claims filed against Hologic in the District of Delaware relating to mammography imaging services.
    • Sharp Corporation in a standards-essential patent arbitration against Interdigital seeking more than US$390 million in damages for violations involving SEPs and FRAND.
    • iBiquity in a multi-million-dollar trial victory in a "bet the company" licensing dispute involving SEPs and FRAND. Successfully dismissed a parallel lawsuit brought against iBiquity in federal court.
    • Microsoft in a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit against Samsung concerning Nokia and the effect of the companies' patent cross-license agreement.
    • EMC Corporation in dismissing patent litigation brought by an Intellectual Ventures "shell" organization in the Eastern District of Texas.
    • Microsoft in dismissing, on summary determination, a defense raised by the U.S. International Trade Commission alleging that Microsoft's patent licensing program for distributers of Android-based devices constituted patent misuse.
    • Microsoft in responding to claims brought against it in French court that Microsoft's pricing for its popular productivity software violated French competition law.
    • Microsoft in defending against an antitrust class action lawsuit on behalf of government entities in Arizona alleging that Microsoft overcharged consumers for its popular operating systems and productivity software.
    • Microsoft in its defense against antitrust class action lawsuits on behalf of indirect purchasers in California, Mississippi and other states alleging that it overcharged consumers for its popular operating systems and productivity software.
    • Microsoft in a four-month antitrust trial in Iowa state court alleging that it overcharged consumers for its popular operating systems and productivity software.
    • Microsoft in a two-month antitrust trial in Minnesota state court alleging that Microsoft overcharged consumers for its popular operating systems and productivity software.
    • Texas Instruments and Stanford in a US$112 million patent damages verdict on behalf of Texas Instruments and Stanford after a four-week jury trial in the District Court of New Jersey; also obtained dismissal of Globespan's antitrust claims alleging that Texas Instrument's patent licensing practices violated U.S. antitrust law.
    • Microsoft in defending against claims that including media player functionality as part of Windows violated U.S. antitrust law.


    • Numerous large technology companies on potential antitrust issues under U.S., EU and Asia competition laws pertaining to the licensing of standards-essential patents.

    Includes matters handled at Dechert or prior to joining the firm



    • Antitrust: Litigation Specialists – District of Columbia Chambers USA
    • Antitrust – Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Defense The Legal 500 US
    • Antitrust – CartelThe Legal 500 US
    • Antitrust – Merger ControlThe Legal 500 US
    • Winner – Reader’s Choice: Academic Articles – Antitrust Writing Awards 2022
    • Finalist – Business, Intellectual Property Articles – Antitrust Writing Awards 2015- 2018, 2020
    • Glory Days: Do the Anticompetitive Effects of Standards-Essential Patent Pools Outweigh Their Procompetitive Benefits? – Co-author, San Diego Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 2 (2021)
    • USPTO, DOJ Downplay Essential Patents' Licensing Terms – Co-author, Law360 (February 7, 2020)
    • FTC v. Qualcomm: Trial and Implications? – Author, Competition Policy International (January 2019)
    • Standard-Essential Patents and Competition Law: An Overview of EU and National Case Law – Forward co-author, e-Competitions (November 22, 2018)
    • United States:  IP and Antitrust – Co-author, The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2019 (published by Global Competition Review) (2018)
    • Japan SEP Licensing Guide Also Aims to Prevent Abuse – Co-author, Law360 (August 27, 2018)
    • Out of Sync? : DOJ’s Policy Reversal Towards SEPs Lacks Legal Support – Co-author, Global Competition Review (June 6, 2018)
    • FOSS Patents' Chipset – Panelist, Component-Level SEP Licensing Conference (November 12, 2020)
    • Anti-Trust Implications on the Enforcement of Patents; Rock-Paper-Scissors, When Can a Statutory Prohibition Trump a Constitutionally Granted Monopoly? – Panelist, EDTX Bench Bar Conference (September 24, 2019)
    • Competition Law: Patent and Trade Implications for Litigation and Commerce – Panelist, Federal Circuit Bar Association's annual Bench & Bar Conference (June 12-15, 2019)
    • Standards, Intellectual Property and the Future of the Internet of Things – Panelist, IoT World (May 15, 2019)
    • Issues and Lessons Learned From the “Smartphone Wars” – Panelist, The App Association's 2019 Patents in Telecoms and the Internet of Things (March 20, 2019)
    • Developments in FRAND “As Applied”: How Parties Are Working with the Ground Rules Now in Place – Panelist, GCR Live IP & Antitrust California 2018 (May 24, 2018)
    • State Bar of Virginia
    • District of Columbia Bar
    • American Bar Association
    • Board of Directors, University of San Diego School of Law Alumni Association
    • Madison's Who's Who of Executives and Professionals