Meryn Grant represents corporations and their executives in securities class actions, litigation relating to mergers and acquisitions, and complex commercial litigation.
Meryn helps clients navigate the full lifecycle of high-stakes litigation. She regularly represents market-leading companies in matters involving:
Securities class actions
Shareholder derivative litigation
Mergers and acquisitions litigation
Internal investigations
Complex, high-exposure litigation
She guides clients through high-publicity matters and develops a unified strategy that aggressively advances a company’s position while protecting its reputation.
Meryn's trial experience includes a rare Rule 10b-5 class action and serving as lead attorney in a four-day federal jury trial.
As she previously served as an internal auditor to a public company, Meryn intimately understands public company accounting and financial statements. Combining her academic background in statistics and knowledge of Food and Drug Administration regulatory approvals, she offers clients strategic insight in their most business-critical situations.
Meryn's active pro bono practice involves matters relating to criminal justice and sentencing reform.
Before joining the firm, Meryn served as a law clerk to Alaska Supreme Court Justice Walter L. Carpeneti. While attending Stanford Law School, she was an article editor for the Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance.
Experience
Meryn's experience includes representing:
Life Sciences & Biopharmaceutical Litigation
Represents Homology in securities class action litigation involving early-phase clinical trials of genetic medicines. Pizzuto v. Homology Medicines, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2022)
Represents Owlet in connection with securities class action litigation arising from Owlet’s deSPAC merger based on alleged failure to disclose risk that Owlet would be required to comply with FDA regulations. Butala v. Owlet (C.D. Cal.)
Represents ChemoCentryx in securities class action litigation involving disclosures regarding NDA submission and FDA communications. Homyk v. ChemoCentryx, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2021).
Represented Puma Biotechnology in a securities class action trial involving its Phase III clinical trial results, defeating more than 95% of the plaintiffs’ claimed damages in a rare Section 10(b) securities class action to go to jury verdict, which the Daily Journal named as one of the Top Verdicts of 2019
Won first round motion to dismiss for Zogenix in a federal securities class action alleging material misstatements and omissions regarding its new drug application submission disclosures; plaintiffs decided not to amend and re-file their claims.
High-Exposure Litigation
Represents Lyft and certain of its current and former executives and directors in class actions filed in California federal and state court arising from Lyft’s high-profile IPO. In re Lyft Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal) & (S.F. Super. Ct.)
Won first-round dismissal with prejudice of securities class action against Match.com arising from US$30 billion spin-off from IAC. In re Match Group, Inc. Deriv. Litig. (Del. Chancery Ct. Sept. 1, 2022)
Won summary judgment on behalf of the US Soccer Federation in its litigation with the US Senior Women’s National Team regarding equal pay. Morgan v. U.S. Soccer Federation (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2020)
Obtained favorable settlement of securities fraud claims for CoreCivic Inc. (formerly Corrections Corporation of America), a private prison operator, where plaintiff alleged that CoreCivic misrepresented its safety, security and rehabilitation standards, which allegedly resulted in the loss of federal government contracts
Secured preliminary injunction against would-be hostile acquirer Valeant and co-conspirator Bill Ackman and his hedge fund management company Pershing Square for insider trading in connection with a US$54.6 billion hostile takeover attempt of specialty pharmaceutical company Allergan, in a transaction named The American Lawyer’s 2015 Global M&A Deal of the Year US. Allergan, Inc. v. Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. (C.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2014); PS Fund 1 v. Allergan, Inc. (Del. Ch. Ct. 2014)
Represented a Swiss-based multinational oilfield service and technology company in securities fraud class actions and derivative actions related to restatement of its financial statements due to tax accounting errors
Initial Public Offering Litigation
Represented Switch, Inc. and its officers and directors in state and federal securities class actions relating to one of 2017’s largest IPOs, securing a stay in state court and ultimate dismissal as a matter of law in federal court
Won motion to dismiss for YogaWorks and its officers and directors in a federal securities class action alleging material misstatements and omissions in IPO offering materials. The court twice granted Latham’s motion to dismiss all claims, ultimately with prejudice, which also resulted in the dismissal of a parallel class action in state court.
M&A Litigation
Represented Excel Trust in several lawsuits challenging its US$2 billion merger with The Blackstone Group and obtained dismissal of a San Diego Superior Court action and denial of class action plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. Branagan v. Excel Trust, Inc. (Md. 2015)
Represented Receptos in shareholder litigation related to its US$7.2 billion sale to Celgene Corporation (Del. Ch. Ct. 2015)
Latham teams honored for knocking out a proposed class action on behalf of CCC Intelligent Solutions Inc. and for securing the dismissal of a shareholder derivative suit for client Switch Inc.
Despite a downward trend in securities case filings over the past three years, Latham & Watkins LLP has remained one of the most active law firms on the defense side, taking over the top spot from Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, according to reports released by Lex Machina.
Notice: We appreciate your interest in Latham & Watkins. If your inquiry relates to a legal matter and you are not already a current client of the firm, please do not transmit any confidential information to us. Before taking on a representation, we must determine whether we are in a position to assist you and agree on the terms and conditions of engagement with you. Until we have completed such steps, we will not be deemed to have a lawyer-client relationship with you, and will have no duty to keep confidential the information we receive from you. Thank you for your understanding.