Archis A. Parasharami

Archis is one of the nation’s leading lawyers both in drafting arbitration agreements—particularly in the consumer and employment contexts—and in litigating the enforceability of those agreements. Most notably, Archis was one of the Mayer Brown lawyers who represented AT&T Mobility in AT&T Mobility in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, in which the US Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state-law rules that would refuse to enforce arbitration agreements solely because they waive class actions. Archis represented the company at all stages of the case, starting from the district court all the way to the Supreme Court, where Archis helped write the winning briefs. Along with his colleagues, Archis has represented the winning petitioners in three other Supreme Court cases involving the enforcement of arbitration agreements:

• Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. Brown, summarily reversing the West Virginia Supreme Court’s categorical refusal to enforce all pre-dispute arbitration agreements that apply to personal-injury or wrongful-death claims against nursing homes as preempted by federal law.
• Kindred Nursing Centers LP v. Clark, holding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a Kentucky rule that requires a power of attorney to expressly refer to arbitration agreements before an attorney-in-fact can bind her principal to an arbitration agreement.
• Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, holding that the Federal Arbitration Act prevents states from requiring class-wide arbitration when an arbitration clause does not expressly provide for that form of arbitration.

Archis also represents companies in threatened and filed mass arbitrations, in which plaintiffs’ counsel seek to represent large numbers of consumers or workers in similar serial arbitrations. Archis has helped businesses reduce the risks of mass arbitrations through novel arbitration drafting strategies as well as procedural and merits-based defenses to those threatened claims.

In addition, Archis has substantial appellate experience, drafting briefs in the US Supreme Court, federal and state appellate courts, and trial courts around the country. Among other things, Archis has prepared merits and amicus briefs in leading appellate cases involving class action and arbitration issues. Archis was among the counsel who represented the petitioner in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, in which the Supreme Court recently held that a lawsuit claiming a bare statutory violation does not satisfy Article III’s injury-in-fact requirement for standing to sue in federal court without allegations of concrete harm.

Archis also advises and represents clients on legislative matters, helping advance substantive business and legal concerns within the public policy-making environment. He has testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on issues relating to class actions and arbitration.

Archis has undertaken a number of pro bono matters, including litigation at the trial and appellate levels and public policy work on human rights issues.

Archis is a member of the firm’s Committee on Diversity and Inclusion. He previously clerked for Judge Leonard I. Garth of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.