Source: https://lawtally.com/lawyers/deanna-rice/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 10:50:43+00:00

Document:
Deanna M. Rice is an experienced litigator who focuses her practice on appeals and complex civil litigation. Deanna has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and has authored appellate briefs on a wide range of subjects, including federal constitutional law, administrative law, securities law, intellectual property, ERISA, tax, and insurance law.
She also has substantial experience at all stages of trial-court litigation, including briefing dispositive motions, coordinating discovery, and shaping trial strategy. Deanna maintains a robust pro bono practice focused primarily on issues of criminal law and procedure, and she serves as the Administrative Coordinator for the Amicus Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Prior to joining O’Melveny, Deanna was a law clerk for the Honorable Bruce M. Selya on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
Co-authored brief for court-appointed amicus curiae in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, No. 17-130, concerning whether SEC Administrative Law Judges are “Officers of the United States” within the meaning of the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Co-authored merits briefs in Ayestas v. Davis, No. 16-6795, which clarified the standard for receiving funding for investigative services in capital cases under 18 U.S.C. § 3599(f).
Briefed and argued Overton v. United States, No. 15-1504, concerning the materiality of evidence withheld by the prosecution under Brady v. Maryland.
Co-authored certiorari- and merits-stage briefs in Merrill Lynch v. Manning, No. 14-1132, which addressed the scope of the exclusive federal jurisdiction provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Co-authored merits brief in Wellness International Network, Limited v. Sharif, No. 13-935, a test of the authority of bankruptcy judges under Article III of the U.S. Constitution.
Co-authored amicus brief on behalf of administrative and immigration law professors in Nielsen v. Preap, No. 16-1363, arguing against application of Chevron deference in the immigration detention context.
Co-authored amicus brief on behalf of criminal law professors in Bravo-Fernandez v. United States, No. 15-537, which involved application of the issue-preclusion component of the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Co-authored amicus brief for former juvenile court judges in Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs, Nos. 10-9646 & 10-9647, in which the Court held that the Eighth Amendment forbids the imposition of mandatory life without parole sentences for juvenile homicide offenders.
Co-authored amicus brief for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Ford Motor Company v. United States, No. 13-113, successfully urging the Court to vacate a decision rejecting Ford’s claim for nearly half a billion dollars in interest on tax overpayments.
Represent a financial services company in ERISA litigation challenging the inclusion of proprietary investment options in the company’s in-house 401(k) plan.
Represent a major medical device company in multiple consumer fraud actions brought by state attorneys general.
Helped secure landmark Florida Supreme Court ruling establishing Sirius XM’s right to broadcast pre-1972 musical recordings and defeating copyright infringement claims, Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio, Inc., 229 So. 3d 305 (Fla. 2017).
Co-authored briefs in appeal raising questions of first impression concerning application of APA notice requirements to inter partes review proceedings, Genzyme Therapeutic Products Ltd. Partnership v. BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., 825 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Defended a global aerospace company in high-stakes ERISA litigation involving challenges to plan fees and investment choices.
Co-authored successful motion to dismiss on behalf of a collegiate athletic association in litigation arising from alleged academic fraud at a member institution.
Co-authored post-trial motions and appellate briefs in successful statute-of-limitations challenge to criminal conspiracy convictions, United States v. Grimm, 738 F.3d 498 (2d Cir. 2013).

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 3599
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.