No products in the cart.
Federal Court Boot Camp (18th Annual): The Nuts and Bolts (CA) (Recorded Package)
Audio program! (check our CLE Programs page for live versions)
Pincus Professional Education has put on its annual Federal Court Boot Camp for eighteen years for a reason – it’s that good.
Large law firms send multiple associates to the program year after year. Why? Because it’s that good.
Small and mid-sized firms send their new associates each year as well. Why? Because it’s that good.
Solo attorneys who have heard from others about the program come. Why? Because it’s that good.
Our Federal Court Boot Camp has taught thousands of attorneys about the ins-and-outs of Federal Court, as well as general litigation strategies and skills. This seminar is both a litigation primer and a primer for litigating in Federal Court.
It is taught by Federal Court Magistrate and Federal District Court judges, very experienced litigators, and a 25+ year career federal law clerk. You’ll get a unique perspective and an inside look at what the court wants and does not want from attorneys practicing in Federal Court.
Attendees have rated our faculty so highly that most of the faculty return to teach year after year (and some have taught every single year).
This litigation course will walk you through the essential components and tasks involved in your case, from start to finish. You’ll learn the rules and tasks, strategies and tactics, and the skills and techniques you must have to become a more effective and successful litigator in Federal Court and to be a more effective and successful litigator in general.
Take a look at our “testimonials” tab for how valuable attendees feel it is to hear from judges, career District Court law clerks and experienced litigators.
And take a look at our detailed agenda to see why our Federal Court Boot Camp program is the best in the state.
This program is geared for the newer attorney, those new to Federal Court, or those seeking a refresher. It is great for all types of attorney: Large firm, small firm, solo, government and legal aid.
This program was recorded live on May 24 & 26, 2022. The recorded packages are now available in audio or video format and include seminar materials.*
* The Video recording is a video of the webinar (including sound). The Audio recording is audio only, for those who wish to listen to it without visuals (such as in the car). You can also purchase both formats together. Note: All downloads must be downloaded to a computer first, before transferring them to another device.
Have you ever thought about improving your public speaking skills? Now is the time! Get Faith Pincus’ book Being Heard: Presentation Skills for Attorneys, from the ABA now (ABA members receive 10%-20% off). Or – you can order a signed paperback from us at a discount here (free shipping). It is also available on Amazon in Kindle and paperback versions.
What You Will Learn
Introduction to Federal Court
- Practical Differences Between State Court and Federal Court Practice
- Material Differences Among California’s Federal Districts
- Highlights from the Local Rules and Local Practice
- Rule 1
Complaint and Answer Rules, Differences, Advice and Strategies
- Plausibility Standard: Rule 8’s Short and Plain Statement
- Forms of Complaints and Answers/Defenses
- Defenses vs. Affirmative Defenses
- Practice Pointers and Pitfalls
- Rule 16.1
- Case Management Reports
Rule 12 and Other Motions
- Top ten tips for drafting Rule 12(b)(6) motions, responses, and replies
- How to enhance the effectiveness of memoranda addressing motions to dismiss
- How to address procedural issues that frequently arise when briefing motions to dismiss
- Additional Rule 12 motions
- Ex Parte Motions
- TRO or preliminary injunctions
Discovery & eDiscovery
- CM/ECF brief overview/advice
- Interrogatories, request to produce – differences between state and federal
- 2015 Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure
- Scope of discovery / proportionality
- Requests for production and responses
- Failure to preserve / sanctions
- How courts have interpreted them
- Overview and considerations
- Sources and preservation
- Federal Rule of Evidence 502
Motion/Oral Argument Tips
- Online depos
- Federal v. State differences
- Subpoenas & affidavits
- Strategy and Deciding whom to depose
- Taking good depositions
- Making effective use of depositions at trial or for settlement
Drafting and Replying to Motions for Summary Judgment
- What judges want, need and don’t want to see
- Trial Briefs
- Pretrial Statement
- Pretrial Conference and Order (FRCP 16)
- Your Jury:
- What is unique about Jury Selection in Federal Court?
- Questionnaire and Voir Dire Tips
- Jury Instructions in Federal Court
- Jury Verdict Forms in Federal Court
- Motions in Limine – including how do they differ from state court?
- Client and Witness Prep.
- Introduction of Exhibits
- Evidentiary Objections
- Direct and Cross-Examinations
- Purpose, audience and format requirements
- Basic direct examination skills
- Basic cross examination skills
- Preserving the Record for Appeal
“Terrific program. It’s been awhile since I handled federal court cases, and this has been an excellent brush up and update, plus the tips from very experienced practitioners are invaluable.” – Linda M. Battram, Esq.
“Good variety of panelist, good mix of opinion and specific procedures.” – Thomas McCarrick, Esq.
“Information is succinct. Easy to understand. Lots of really good information. Nice to get insight from practitioners as well as a judge’s perspective.” – Dawn M. Reitsma, Esq.
“The program was great. It was just the kind of “refresher” I was looking for. I appreciated each speaker’s stories and tips. Hearing stories is such a great way to learn and remember.”
“Good overall information about federal court practice. Helpful insights and tips.” – John P. Yasuda, Esq.
“This was helpful, especially as an introduction to federal practice. I wish I had taken this course a few months early, I feel like I absorbed much of this through trial and error in the last few months.” – Matthew Slentz, Esq.
“Excellent program — very good, practical advice.” – Sean Ryan Broderick, Esq.
“Great – very valuable and practical advice (particularly to hear the judges’ thoughts on particular motions, standards, etc.).”
“This was one of the most interesting, helpful and useful MCLE programs I have ever attended! Good coverage of practical topics.” – Harvie Schrieber, Esq.
“It was a great refresher on the federal rules and the panelists had great anecdotes from personal experience. My federal practice is heating up so a refresher was needed.” – Page Allinson, Esq.
“I thought the content was a great overview. I really liked the case-specific examples and pointers that the speakers drew on during their discussion.”
“I thought it was very interesting overall and I learned a lot (more than I usually get out of an MCLE).”– Alice Zajic, Esq.
“Great to hear insights from judges and experienced practitioners, and a very experienced law clerk with private practice experience. The Q& A sessions were great to hear.” – Tracy Woo, Esq.
“Excellent and diverse speakers. The two judges really gave credibility to the topic.” – Derrick James McKain, Esq.
“Invaluable to have the judge’s advice and opinions.” – Genevieve Coyle, Esq.
“Highlighting differences between State and Federal Court procedures in California was extremely helpful.”
“It was a really good seminar. Very good. Thank you. It provided me very valuable assistance with the Rule 16 and 26 issues.” – Olivia Bissell, Esq.
“I enjoyed the CLE program and found the dialogue between the speakers very informative.”
“Great program! Very informative and interesting. Looking forward to future seminars.” – Iveta Ovsepyan, Esq.
“I enjoyed the practical nature of the presentation and the back and forth discussion. The panel put together was an excellent combination of different experiences. I loved hearing from the Judges, who were both practitioners, the clerk who generally deals with the various motions, and the various attorneys from both sides plaintiff and defense.” – Cynthia D. Vargas, Esq.
“I am a new lawyer. This was a great course to help put many things in focus. Gave me great advice.” – Jeshawna R. Harrell, Esq.
“Great outlines for future reference. Concise presentation format. Very well done. Knowledgeable speakers.” – Michael Caballero, Esq.
“I am fully satisfied. This was a great primer for practicing in Federal Court. This was one of the best seminars that I’ve been to in my 13 years of practicing law. It makes me want to never go to state court ever again.” – Richard Jefferson, Esq.
“I enjoyed the experience shared amongst the speakers and their ability to provide personal context to some of the discussed issues.”
“I didn’t know much about federal civil practice, so it was nice to get a start to finish overview. It wasn’t overwhelming. It was a good procedural overview with practical tips.” – Kree D. Filer, Esq.
“This is a great survey course regarding differences between state and federal court. Judge Olguin’s comments always included practical advice that is extremely helpful and adds to the topics substantially. He is great. Judge Segal had the best, most substantive interjections. I’d go to any discussions or lectures led by her. Excellent!” – Grace Lau, Esq.
“Very good tune-up for me, who hasn’t practiced in federal court in 10 years.”
“The program was incredibly helpful.”
“The panelists covered every important topic in-depth. Thank you for having this seminar!” – Ari Kaufman, Esq.
“Good recap of basics of federal practice with useful pointers. Proper depth given the breadth of subjects.” – Matthew Roman, Esq.
“Engaging speakers and course material was presented in a concise and clear way.”
“Great topics, excellent speakers.” – Brittany Toth, Esq.
“I really enjoyed listening to the practitioner’s trial tips.”
“Very informative and definitely worth your time.” – Jesse Ruiz, Esq.
“As a state court criminal defense attorney, I found the review of FRCP helpful.”
“I specifically enjoyed the practical experiences shared by the presenters.” – Joe Anglin, Esq.
“I thought the program was informative, particularly when discussing motion strategy.” – Paul Thomas, Esq.
“A really good webinar, with great speakers.” – Luca Prisciandaro, Esq.
“I found the program very helpful as presenters shared personal experiences.” – Joseph V. Anglin, Esq.
“Offering differing viewpoints of each party in an action is very informative.”
“Excellent and well-rounded panel.” – Sean Ryan Broderick, Esq.
“Very helpful to have judges’ perspectives along with practitioners.”
“I think the program is great and does what it needs to do.”
“All speakers were good – especially the judge and the law clerk.” – Ann Hull, Esq.
“It was a good boot camp covering the basics, and it gave me a good insight into judicial thinking.”
“Very interesting.” – Francisco A. Suarez, Esq.
“Excellent! Will be back! Everyone was great!” – David A. Wolf, Esq.
“Completely satisfied. This was outstanding!” – Nancy Woods, Esq.
“I like having the law clerk and judges’ perspectives.”
“Great program! Really informative!” – Deborah Gettleman, Esq.
“Loved it!” – Jugpreet Mann, Esq.
“Great program. Thanks!” – Sean Ryan Broderick, Esq.
“Great to hear the perspective of a clerk. I found the voire dire tips to be very helpful. Loved the 8 components for opening statement and the points on evidence and cross-examination.” – Michelle Rahban, Esq.
“A very good program. All the speakers were helpful and informative.” – Richard Stoll, Esq.
“Very helpful and instructive.” – Gregory Yu, Esq.
“Great refresher course and helpful practical advice.” – Matthew Peters, Esq.
“Presentation was well-done and informative. The insights of the panel members was enlightening.” – Joseph A. Gordon, Esq.
“As a mother and a lawyer, I felt very respected and valued by Pincus. The rallying cry for equality for women is ‘The future is female.’ Well, that future looks like the way Venus and Grace treat your customers.” – Maha Ibrahim, Esq.
“It was great! Thank you!” – Ashleigh Musser, Esq.
“Very good speakers.” – Susan Horst, Esq.
“Well done, head to toe.” – John Cammack, Esq.
“This was a well-done presentation. Very informative.” – Philip John Downs Jr, Esq.
“The entire panel did a great job and delivered well.” –Tom Borchard, Esq.
“I was very satisfied!” – Courtney Arbucci, Esq.
“Highly satisfied. Hearing from multiple clerks was helpful.” – Tim O’Connor, Esq.
“Very satisfied – gave me what I wanted. Basic info with strategic uses.” – Joseph Charles, Esq.
“Very good, candid advice.” – Daniel Zarchy, Esq.
“Great job. Very informative and well presented.” – Jonathan T. Dawson, Esq.
“I really enjoyed the program and the speakers. Having a judicial clerk was also extremely valuable.” – Dana Ulise, Esq.
“Great speakers. I thoroughly enjoyed the information.” – Marty Nicholson, Esq.
“Excellent.” – Megan Irish, Esq.
“Very practical information. Very helpful for negotiating the federal arena.” – Helene Friedman, Esq.
“A great primer for both new and experienced attorneys.” – Peter Ton, Esq.
“Great CLE.” – James Howard, Esq.
“Great presentation! Very informative!” – Kari Martin Higgins, Esq.
“Excellent.” – John P. Yasuda, Esq.
“Great information, very helpful.” – Oianka McElmurry, Esq.
“Good review and run-down of the issues.” – Daniel Marsh, Esq.
“What a great concept to have the clerks conduct the seminar! So informative!” – Neyleen Beljajev, Esq.
“All the faculty were top notch – very professional and informative and competent.” – Paul Carreras, Esq.
“Good information regarding the different FRCP. Very Satisfied.” – Michelle J. Smythe, Esq.
“This was a good re-introduction; Very informative and insightful for someone looking to learn the ins & outs of Federal Court.” – Eric Wills, Esq.
“I was very pleased with this program. It is definitely worth the money and travel!” – Christina Milligan
“Important subject for practitioners in Federal Court. Good topic, good speakers.” – D. David Steele, Esq.
“Very enjoyable and knowledgeable seminar! Thank you!” – Aman A. Lal, Esq.
“Excellent program.” – Kori Macksoud, Esq.
“The speakers were good at recognizing the variety of lawyers in the audience.” – Phyra McCandless, Esq.
“I’m new to Federal Court. This program offered a good introduction.” – Katherine Broderick, Esq.
“Each speaker gave great examples…and I appreciated the fact that there were attorneys representing the plaintiff side and the defense side. I appreciated the insight of both judges. It was great to have them attend! This is a great seminar for Federal Court beginners or a refresher for seasoned veterans in Federal Court.” – Nicole Dennewitz, Paralegal
“An excellent program.” – Barbara Reardon, Esq.
“Very good – no boring, droning lecturing. Kept me engaged throughout. Women and a diverse panel – yay! Thanks for a great program.”
“The war stories and practitioners’ points are honestly the most helpful parts.”
“Information is succinct. Easy to understand. Lots of really good information. Nice to get insight from practitioners as well as a judge’s perspective.”
“Another very thorough crash-course put on by Pincus. Very helpful!”
“Part 2 was great, just like Part 1. Each panelist had unique experience and perspective that I appreciated.”
“Very informative & well presented.”
“Enjoyed listening to each speaker and their experience.”
“Wonderful insight from highly experienced persons. I liked that it was conversational with various people chiming in. That doesn’t work in these trainings, but it was well executed with this group at least. Kept things interesting whereas sometimes more structured trainings can get dry.”
“A very good program. I’ve been practicing for 12 years, but recently transitioned from almost all state court cases to federal court cases. I was worried the program might be geared towards brand new attorneys, but I found most of the information helpful.”
“Great speakers, very informative and comprehensive.”
“I found the program very helpful as presenters shared personal experiences
Was excellent and very informative.”
“All speakers were very knowledgeable. I appreciated hearing from the judge’s perspective, as well as Chaya’s as a Plaintiffs’ attorney vs. the other attorneys.”
“Judge Segal’s input to the panel’s advice was always welcome and appreciated. Laurie Smith consistently and effectively provided insightful remarks throughout the day. She’s an excellent panelist.”
“Today was EXCELLENT, thank you!”
“Speakers and materials were very knowledgeable and interesting.”
“It was great!”
“Good practical information.”
“Good overview and refresher.”
“Everything was great and very informative.”
“I specifically enjoyed the practical experiences shared by the presenters.”
“Great speakers, very informative.”
“I thought the program was informative, particularly when discussing motion strategy.”
“This was helpful, especially as an introduction to federal practice. I wish I had taken this course a few months early, I feel like I absorbed much of this through trial and error in the last few months.”
“The content was excellent and the speakers were outstanding.”
“Felt it was extremely useful and met every expectation.”
“I thought the program and presentation were excellent. We just filed a Rule 26 Disclosure today and I’m feeling pretty confident about what we did after listening to this. I enjoyed all the speakers but especially appreciated the observations of the Honorable Karen Stevenson.”
“I really enjoyed the advice about the tone of federal courts generally, and also how to prepare witnesses.”
“I thought all the speakers today were excellent.”
“This program is excellent for its target audience.”
“Thank you for your hard work!”
“It was a beautiful program and I learnt a lot. There was a lot of theory that I enjoyed.”
“It was a lot of great information.”
“The content was presented well.”
“It was a good overview and refresher.”
“Very helpful tips and information.”
“Great topics, excellent speakers.”
“Very informative and engaging. Great speakers.”
“I liked the Judge.”
“The program was very informative and the speakers have a great rapport with each other.”
“All speakers were good – especially the judge and the law clerk.”
“Very detailed. Thank you.”
“Very useful, practical information.”
“Very well done.”
“Very well done. Good speakers.”
“Great content. Really enjoyed Judge Stevenson.”
“I enjoyed the program, very informative.”
“Very informative. Good.”
“A very helpful presentation.”
“I think the program was very informative and well put together. It was also nice to have everyone’s perspectives on various topics. I think the course was very thorough. I really appreciated more of the practical tips.”
“I found the program very helpful as an overview to litigation and many of the topics discussed have application in state court as well.”
“I thought the program was really interesting–especially the first part of the day. I really enjoyed hearing from Judge Corley and from Plaintiffs’ side firms. I also found the tips to be very helpful. It was a good overview of material.”
“I am no longer afraid to practice in federal court.”
“Great mix of judges, clerks, and practitioners.”
“Appreciate that everything advertised is what I got.”
“Thank you. Another excellent program.”
“Very informative and practical advice; good for new lawyers.”
“I practice in federal court regularly and was hoping to get some practice tips to improve my representation and also to confirm or correct the lessons I have learned in practice – the program did exactly that.”
“If this faculty is an example of Pincus, I’ll always attend. Great work!”
“Very helpful! Materials are nice.”
“Speakers were knowledgeable and relatable. Very informative.”
“Good insight. Good comments.”
“I found this a very helpful nuts and bolts for new attorneys.”
“The information was helpful and the materials (checklists in particular) will be useful here on out.”
“Outlines were extremely effective.”
“Best CLE course I have ever attended!”
“I enjoyed the individual tips, stories & examples – makes it easier to remember procedures.”
“Great program. Law clerks’ views are most valuable.”
“Appreciated the FRCP updates: this was the best part of the program.”
“I practice class action law, so I enjoyed hearing about the speaker’s experience.”
“All excellent speakers – both in content and delivery.”
“Very happy. Not many CLE’s specialize in federal law. I wish I had taken this course earlier!”
“Motions presentation was worth the entire price. Humor works! Anecdotes were great!”
“Great Job! An excellent course. Informative presentations!”
“Very good program – the law clerk perspective should be heard by all lawyers.”
“Great practical advice.”
“I liked how Chaya M. Mandelbaum provided a deposition strategies outline in addition to the slides.”
“I most appreciated comments from judges and law clerks of federal courts as to insights of inner workings.”
“Excellent balance of substantive information, personal observations & idiosyncrasies of bench potentially relevant to practitioners.”
“Very good program.”
“I learned more about federal court civil procedure than any other class I have taken.”
“Liked the updates regarding the current situation.”
Hon. Stanley A. Boone
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
Judge Boone was appointed to the federal bench as a United States magistrate judge on December 31, 2012. Prior to his appointment, he served for almost twenty-three years in a variety of capacities, both civil and criminal, with the United States Department of Justice. In June 2010, Judge Boone became the Chief of the White Collar Crime unit in the Fresno United States Attorney’s office where he handled cases and supervised Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the areas of economic fraud, identity theft, intellectual property, money laundering, taxation, child pornography and immigration. From 2009 to 2010, Judge Boone was stationed in Washington, D.C. as the White Collar Crime Coordinator for the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, United States Department of Justice. In that role, he represented the United States Attorney’s community in reviewing and formulating policy and legislation involving white collar crime. From 1996 to 2009, Judge Boone was an Assistant United States Attorney in the Criminal Division of the Fresno U.S. Attorney’s office handling a wide variety of cases, including white collar, national security, intellectual property, public corruption, identity theft, health care fraud and other federal crime cases. During this time, Judge Boone held positions as misdemeanor unit supervisor, Elections Officer, Bankruptcy Fraud Coordinator and International Coordinator. Throughout his tenure, Judge Boone wrote and argued a number of appeals before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, including an en banc argument. From 1989 to 1995, Judge Boone was employed by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the United States Trustee, handling civil matters associated with financial audits and bankruptcy litigation. During a portion of that time, Judge Boone attended evening law school and, as a student certified attorney, handled civil law and motion, discovery litigation and civil bench trials.
Judge Boone is co-author of a chapter entitled “Disaster-Related Federal Crimes” for the Crisis Response and Related Litigation (2009 ed.) book, which is part of the U.S. Justice Department “Blue Book” series (practical “how to” books for prosecutors). He is also co-author on an article in the U.S. Attorney’s Bulletin on financial fraud entitled “Mortgage Fraud Working Group.”
Judge Boone has traveled to other countries, including Russia, Bulgaria and India, to help assess, train and lecture judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials in criminal prosecution. He was a frequent lecturer at the Justice Department’s training facilities in South Carolina, Washington, D.C. and elsewhere, teaching trial advocacy and a variety of white collar crime subject matters (mortgage, bankruptcy and bank fraud, money laundering and identity theft). He has spoken for a variety of federal agencies, including the Federal Reserve, HUD, Secret Service and FBI, and was also a frequent lecturer for other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies on topics involving Fourth and Fifth Amendment jurisprudence and substantive law. For his work, Judge Boone received commendations from FBI Directors Louis J. Freeh and Robert S. Mueller, III, Secret Service Directors W. Ralph Basham and Mark J. Sullivan and others.
Judge Boone received his undergraduate degree at the University of California, Berkeley, majoring in Legal Studies with an Asian Studies minor. His undergraduate studies also included a concentration in business administration and accounting. He received his law degree at the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, California, where he received the Valedictorian Award for his evening class, Order of the Coif, the Roger J. Traynor Honor Society and American Jurisprudence awards in Constitutional Law and Criminal Procedure.
Judge Boone was a judicial law clerk to U.S. Magistrate Judge Peter A. Nowinski in Sacramento. He served as Federal Bar Association, San Joaquin Valley Chapter, President for part of 2009 and all of 2012.
Judge Boone is an adjunct professor at San Joaquin College of Law in Fresno, and has taught courses in appellate moot court, federal courts and evidence. He is presently chair of the Eastern District of California’s Local Rules committee and serves as a member of the court’s Technology User Group. Judge Boone has extensive trial experience both as a litigator and a judge in both the civil and criminal arenas. To see more detailed information regarding his courtroom procedures, including trial, see the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California’s website (http://www.caed.uscourts.gov) under Judges; United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone (SAB) in the area entitled “Case Management Procedures” with links to “Standard Information”, “Courtroom Technology”, “Pre-Trial and Trial Procedures/Deadlines”, “Jury Selection” and “Trial Conduct and Decorum” as well as other areas.
Hon. Fernando Olguin
District Court Judge
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
Judge Olguin began his legal career in 1989 as a judicial law clerk for a federal judge in the District of Arizona. In 1991, he was selected to be a member of the United States Attorney General’s Honors Program, where he worked in the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. After leaving the Department of Justice in 1994, Judge Olguin joined the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (“MALDEF”) as the National Director of the Education Program. In 1995, Judge Olguin became a name partner in the Pasadena-based law firm, Traber, Voorhees & Olguin, a firm that litigated housing and employment cases.
Judge Olguin was appointed to serve as a United States Magistrate Judge in 2001. In December 2012, Judge Olguin was confirmed as a United States District Judge. He maintains his chambers in Los Angeles.
Hon. Suzanne H. Segal (Ret.)
Retired Magistrate Judge, CDCA
Neutral, Signature Resolution
After 18 years as a United States Magistrate Judge with the Central District of California, including four years as the Chief Magistrate Judge, Hon. Suzanne H. Segal (Ret.) joins Signature Resolution as a mediator, arbitrator and Special Master/Discovery Referee. During her tenure on the federal bench, Judge Segal presided over numerous trials, evidentiary hearings, motions and discovery conferences involving diverse subject matter. Judge Segal served as the settlement judge in hundreds of cases, settling business and insurance disputes, patent, trademark and copyright actions, and employment, civil rights, and tort cases. Judge Segal handled a wide range of motions and settlements arising out of class actions, particularly in the wage and hour context.
Judge Segal has broad experience in securities litigation, including matters brought by private investors and the SEC. In addition, Judge Segal has extensive experience in matters involving the False Claims Act and related actions involving the healthcare industry.
Judge Segal has served as a Special Master or Discovery Referee in cases involving the False Claims Act, mass tort and insurance claims, patent litigation, and product liability claims.
Before her appointment to the bench, Judge Segal served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Civil Division of the Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s Office for 12 years. As an AUSA, Judge Segal handled a variety of cases, including contract, employment, civil rights, Medicare reimbursement and tort claims. She also brought consumer and civil rights actions on behalf of the Department of Justice. From 1999 to
2002, she served as the Chief of Civil Appeals for the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Prior to serving in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Judge Segal was a civil litigator at Dewey, Ballantine and Adams, Duque and Hazeltine.
Judge Segal has also served as a lecturer in Law at UCLA School of Law and Loyola Law School.
Judge Segal is known for her work ethic and persistent dedication to reach a positive result for the parties.
John L. Barber, Esq.
John Barber is a partner in the Los Angeles and Orange County offices of Lewis Brisbois, Chair of the Labor & Employment Practice, and a member of the firm’s Management Committee. His practice is dedicated exclusively to representing and counseling employers in employment-related matters, including litigation, appeals, risk management, policy preparation, and training.
He represents employers in State and Federal Courts, both in California and across the United States, and has extensive experience appearing before all state and federal employment-related agencies, including the California DFEH, DLSE, and EDD, and United States EEOC, and Department of Labor.
Mr. Barber’s practice has a particular emphasis, in addition to single-party discrimination, harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination actions, on wage-and-hour class action litigation. He has defended dozens of class actions, and has specifically defeated Motions for Class Certification. Mr. Barber also serves as one of the principal, lead trial attorneys in the Practice Group, with numerous successful verdicts. He is also a member of the Crisis Management Practice and regularly manages crises pertaining to employment matters.
Mr. Barber served on the California State Bar’s Executive Committee, Labor and Employment Law Section (2008 – 2013) and was an advisor to that committee for years. He was a member of the Judicial Appointments Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar (2009-2014) and is currently a member of the Los Angeles County Bar’s Judicial Election Evaluation Committee (2012-present). He also lectures and writes extensively.
Active in the community as a member of multiple philanthropic and civic organizations, Mr. Barber is married with three children.
Amanda Karl, Esq.
Gibbs Law Group LLP
Amanda Karl represents consumers, employees and others who have been harmed by corporations. She has prosecuted a wide range of complex cases, including product defect, failure-to-warn, wage and hour, data breach, sexual assault, and securities cases, within a variety of industries. In addition, Amanda is committed to fighting voter suppression—she spearheads Gibbs Law Group’s Voting Rights Task Force.
Amanda is a 2014 graduate (Order of the Coif) of the University of California at Berkeley School of Law, where she served as the Managing Editor of the California Law Review and Director of the Workers’ Rights Disability Law Clinic. During law school, she worked as a Clinical Law Student at the East Bay Community Law Center, assisting with litigation targeting criminal record reporting violations, and as a law clerk at Equal Rights Advocates, working on women’s employment issues. Amanda received her undergraduate degree, magna cum laude, in Sociology and Human Rights from Columbia University in 2009.
Following graduation from law school, she served as a law clerk to the Honorable Richard A. Paez, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and to the Honorable Claudia Wilken, Northern District of California. Outside of work, Amanda serves on the Board of Directors of the East Bay Community Law Center, a legal nonprofit organization that is both the largest provider of free legal services in the East Bay Area and Berkeley Law’s largest clinical offering.
Meghan F. Loisel, Esq.
Meghan Féronie Loisel joined the firm in 2016 because she wanted to represent employees who stand up for their rights. Meghan helps employees subjected to workplace discrimination or retaliation to hold their employers accountable. She also works to ensure that employers honor the contractual commitments they make to their employees and pay them the wages and benefits owed. Meghan’s litigation practice includes both individual cases and class actions in court and arbitration.
Meghan focused on employment law during law school, working as a law clerk representing low-income workers at Legal Aid at Work. After completing a litigation fellowship with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project in New York City, she returned to the Bay Area and worked for Santa Clara County as a deputy county counsel. This role provided Meghan with insight into public employee representation. She was herself a public employee and union member. She also defended the County and its employees in employment, civil rights, and tort cases. Meghan relies on this balanced view of employment litigation to provide her clients with evenhanded assessments of their cases.
Meghan graduated from New York University School of Law and is a member of the California Bar and New York Bar.
Chaya Mandelbaum, Esq.
Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, LLP
Chaya Mandelbaum is a Partner at Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, LLP where he represents employees in individual and class action litigation and negotiations across the spectrum of employment law. He has extensive experience in wage and hour, discrimination, retaliation, harassment and leave of absence matters.
Chaya also recently served as Chair of the California Fair Employment and Housing Council. He was appointed and re-appointed to the position by former California Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and his appointment and re-appointment were confirmed by the California Senate. The Council promulgates regulations related to employment and housing discrimination and holds hearings on civil rights issues confronting the state.
Before joining Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, Chaya was a Senior Litigation Counsel at Sanford Heisler. At Sanford Heisler, he represented employees in class actions involving wage and hour, discrimination and other civil rights claims.
Previously, Chaya was a Trial Attorney in the Office of the Solicitor for the United States Department of Labor. In that capacity, he successfully represented the Secretary of Labor in numerous significant enforcement actions, including a multi-million dollar wage and penalty recovery based on violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. He obtained successful results in both jury and bench trials during his tenure.
Prior to his service at the Department of Labor, Chaya worked in the Labor and Employment Practice Group at Morgan Lewis & Bockius, where he represented employers in matters involving wage and hour, employment discrimination and labor relations.
Andrew Owen, Esq.
Andrew Owen focuses his practice on litigating and trying catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death cases involving trucks, commercial vehicles, pedestrians, industrial or construction accidents, as well as dangerous conditions of public and private property. Mr. Owen also devotes a portion of his practice to consumer class actions against businesses that engage in unfair and illegal business practices.
Prior to joining Panish | Shea | Boyle | Ravipudi LLP, Mr. Owen worked as a paralegal, law clerk and attorney at O’Donnell & Associates, a boutique civil litigation and trial firm that specialized in complex, multi-million dollar state and federal lawsuits involving antitrust, entertainment, intellectual property, energy, securities, products liability, toxic tort, real estate, constitutional law, finance, and business disputes.
Some of Mr. Owen’s prior work included: In re Katrina Canal Breaches Consolidated Litigation: twin suits against United States and a private contractor alleging their negligence caused plaintiffs’ flood damage during Hurricane Katrina. State of California ex rel. Hindin v. Hewlett Packard Company and Agilent Technologies Inc.: qui tam suit for violation of California False Claims Act. The State of Nevada v. Watanabe: white-collar criminal defense of gambler involving a gaming debt of over million. In re Natural Gas Anti-trust Cases I, II, III, IV: consumer class action antitrust case concerning natural gas price fixing during 2000-01 energy crisis.
Mr. Owen has been named among the Best Lawyers in America® in the area of Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs, recognized as a Southern California Rising Star by the Super Lawyers publication, and is a member of the State Bar of California, the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. He is also an active member of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles.
While working as a law clerk, Mr. Owen attended the night program at Southwestern Law School where he graduated cum laude. He earned Highest Honors in Legal Research & Writing, Alternative Dispute Resolution, and California Pretrial Practice. Mr. Owen was also an active member of Moot Court and competed in the 2008 National Telecommunications Competition at Catholic University, where his team won First Place and he won Best Oralist.
Ami Sanghvi, Esq.
The Marek Law Firm
Ami began her legal career pursuing economic justice for the homeless in New York City through individual and class action representation. She began working on civil rights issues with a focus on gender justice and employment discrimination. Ami spent over ten years as a Trial Attorney for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She has advised on federal investigations, litigated cases in federal court, settled cases with meaningful injunctive relief to affect workplace change, and taken cases through federal jury trials. Ami is a passionate advocate for employee rights and believes in each person’s unqualified right to enjoy a dignified workplace.
Ami received her Juris Doctor from the Fordham University School of Law and her Bachelor’s degree with honors in Sociology from New York University. Ami is a member of the New York bar and the California bar. She is a member of the California Employment Lawyers Association and the South Asian Bar Association of Northern California.
Laurie E. Smith, Esq.
Career Law Clerk
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
Laurie Smith has served as a career law clerk for the Honorable John F. Walter, U.S. District Court Judge for the Central District of California for more than 15 years. Prior to that, Ms. Smith litigated at several law firms in Northern and Southern California. Ms. Smith served as Managing Editor for the Virginia Tax Review Law Journal and is a 1996 graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law.
Three Recorded Package options to choose from:
Video (with sound)* Recording & Materials Package – CD or Download: $425
Audio Only* Recording & Materials Package – CD or Download: $425
Order both the Video* and Audio Only* Packages for only $50 more – CD or Download: $475
*The Video recording is a video of the webinar (with sound). The Audio recording is audio only, for those who wish to listen to it without visuals (such as in the car).
Note: All downloads must be downloaded to a computer first, before transferring them to another device.
For CDs, please add $8.50 shipping and, in CA, sales tax.
This program will be recorded live on May 24 & 26, 2022.
(Recorded packages are available approximately two to three weeks after the seminar is held.)
CA General: This program is approved for 7.0 general CLE units in California.
NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 7.0 CLE units. Pincus Professional Education is a CA Accredited Provider, which is a NY approved jurisdiction. See Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines for further information.
This program is approved for CLE in the states listed above. Upon request, Pincus Pro Ed will provide any information an attorney needs to support their application for CLE approval in other states other than what is listed above.