RUTHANNE M. DEUTSCH

FOUNDING PARTNER

Dedication to sharp analysis and effective writing have been the constants throughout Ruthanne’s professional life, whether in her previous career as an international development economist, or throughout her many years of practice as an appellate advocate.  Her legal experience spans the public, private, and academic clinical sectors, and includes appearances before the Supreme Court of the United States and federal and state appellate courts throughout the country.  She is a Fellow in the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, has served on the Advisory Committee on Procedures of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and has been named a Best Lawyer for Appellate Practice since 2021. Her areas of concentration include federal jurisdiction, federal practice and procedure, copyright law, and patent and tort cases involving legal questions of first impression.

Practice and Background

Ruthanne has briefed scores of appeals in the federal courts of appeal and state courts of last resort, as well as dozens of briefs at the merits and certiorari stages in the Supreme Court of the United States. She has argued before the Supreme Court and the Fourth, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits.  She has also argued before the Maryland Court of Appeals (on a question certified by the Fourth Circuit). In addition to her appellate work, Ruthanne has considerable experience litigating complex procedural and dispositive motions. She frequently counsels clients on appellate strategy before complaints are even filed on forum selection, claim crafting, and preservation of appellate issues, and has also provided post-judgment counseling.

Ruthanne served as a law clerk for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court of the United States, and for Judge Timothy B. Dyk, of the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.  Immediately before co-founding Deutsch Hunt PLLC, she served as a Clinical Teaching Fellow and Supervising Attorney at the Appellate Litigation Clinic and Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, where she supervised briefing, argued cases, regularly participated in moot courts, taught a seminar for judicial interns, and co-taught appellate advocacy and federal practice.  She maintains her connection to the Law Center through participation in moot courts at Georgetown's Supreme Court Institute.

Ruthanne has served in the Office of General Counsel of the Federal Trade Commission, where she briefed and argued appeals and dispositive legal motions, reviewed complaints, liaised with other agencies and the Office of the Solicitor General on Supreme Court matters, and counseled enforcement staff on legal issues.  While at the FTC, she received an Official Commendation for Meritorious Service for her “outstanding contributions to the Commission’s litigation efforts.” She also practiced in the D.C.-based Supreme Court and Appellate Practice Groups of two Am Law 100 firms.

Ruthanne studied International Relations and Economics at Yale University, where she received a Ph.D. in Economics.  Her work as an international development economist (at the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank) involved in-country projects, and policy research and strategy development, primarily in the areas of poverty reduction, social sectors reform, early childhood development, and promoting gender equity and social inclusion.

Ruthanne studied law at Georgetown University Law Center, where she was Executive Articles Editor of the Georgetown Law Journal and graduated from the Law Center summa cum laude. Years later, she returned to Georgetown as a clinical teaching fellow with the Georgetown Appellate Litigation Program, and received an LL.M. in advocacy, with distinction.

Selected Matters

Supreme Court

• FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project, 141 S. Ct. 1150 (2021): As lead counsel, represented Respondents and argued on the merits that the Commission acted arbitrarily and capriciously in repealing most of its broadcast ownership rules without any reasoned analysis of the repeal's likely impact on ownership diversity, a long-established and important component of the public interest served by the ownership rules. While upholding agency action as reasonable, the Supreme Court agreed that ownership diversity was appropriately considered as a component of the public interest, despite arguments to the contrary by industry petitioners.

• K.G.S. v. Facebook, Inc., No. 19-910 (S. Ct.): As lead counsel, filed a petition for certiorari arguing that the Supreme Court should grant review to decide whether virtual contacts can establish specific personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant under the effects-based test of Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 788–89 (1984), where a tortfeasor, by disseminating content focused on the forum state, has knowingly caused the plaintiff to suffer reputational and emotional harm in that state.

• TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, No. 19-1269 (S. Ct.): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief in support of certiorari on behalf of the Fair Standards Alliance, arguing that absent Supreme Court review, the Federal Circuit's decision requiring juries to decide fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms for standard-essential patents seriously jeopardizes the FRAND commitments that are essential to economic growth and innovation.

• Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, 139 S. Ct. 1407 (2019): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief on behalf of the North American Securities Administrators Association in support of Respondents, arguing that Section 14(e) of the Williams Act provides a remedy for shareholders harmed by negligently untruthful disclosures related to tender offers and that the petition should be dismissed as improvidently granted, which it was.

• Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief in support of affirming the judgment below on behalf of the Association of Administrative Law Judges, arguing that SEC ALJs are not inferior officers, but any ruling otherwise should not control for ALJs in other agencies, and that ALJ tenure protections are constitutional

• Patchak v. Zinke, 138 S. Ct. 897 (2018): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief in support of Respondents on behalf of a group of federal courts and federal Indian law scholars, arguing that an act taking a particular parcel into trust and withdrawing jurisdiction over certain claims related to that parcel does not violate Article III and is an example of a common type of tribe-specific legislation. This brief was cited in the Court’s opinion.

• Nies v. Town of Emerald Isle, No. 16-1305: As lead counsel, filed a successful brief in opposition to a petition for certiorari filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation. The petition claimed that public use of North Carolina beaches was a taking despite historic and long-standing public use of the beaches.

• California Public Employees' Retirement Sys. v. ANZ Securities Inc., 137 S. Ct. 2042 (2017): Lead counsel for an amicus brief on behalf of Current and Former Directors of Publicly Traded Companies in support of Petitioner, arguing that the filing of a putative class action should satisfy the three-year time limit for putative class members in certain securities class actions, because otherwise the result would be a multiplicity of actions and more litigation that increases complexity for defendants.

Federal Courts of Appeals

• Gregorini v. Apple Inc., Nos. 20-55664, -55846 (9th Cir.): Successfully argued appeal contending that dismissal of copyright claims was inappropriate where the complaint plausibly alleged multiple concrete, detailed similarities in expressive elements of two fully-realized works.

• Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, Inc., No. 21-2949 (2d Cir.): Filed an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellants on behalf of the National Music Publishers’ Association, Recording Industry Association of America, and Copyright Alliance, arguing that that a district court’s application of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provisions regarding “red flag” knowledge and the “right and ability to control” cannot be squared with a basic understanding of the music industry and related technology.

• Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox Communication, Inc., No. 21-1168 (4th Cir.): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees on behalf of the National Music Publishers' Association, Nashville Songwriters Association International, and Songwriters of North America, arguing that vicarious liability for copyright infringement does not require "draw" and that separately-owned musical compositions and sound recordings are entitled to separate statutory damages for each separately sold individual song.

• Blumenthal v. Trump, No. 19-5237 (D.C. Cir.): As lead counsel, filed an amicus brief on behalf of scholars of standing, federal jurisdiction, and constitutional law, arguing that the unique structure of the foreign emoluments clause gives members of Congress Article III standing.

• City of Oakland v. B.P. P.L.C., 969 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 2020): As lead counsel, drafted an amicus brief on behalf of property and tort law scholars, arguing that several cities' claims seeking equitable abatement of harms caused by the wrongful overpromotion of fossil fuels arise out of state public nuisance law and therefore should be remanded to state court.

• Johnson v. Interstate Management LLC, 849 F.3d 1093 (D.C. Cir. 2017): Supervised briefing and presented oral argument for Georgetown University Appellate Litigation Program, appointed as amicus to argue that § 11(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act of 1970 contains an implied right of action for persons retaliated against for filing OSHA complaints, and (after grant of a motion for reconsideration of a partial summary affirmance) that genuine issues defeat summary judgment on the plaintiff’s EEOC retaliation claim.

• Putney v. Likin, 4th Cir. No. 14-6882 (4th Cir. July 14, 2016): Supervised briefing and presented oral argument for Georgetown University Appellate Litigation Program, and successfully obtained vacatur of the district court’s summary judgment dismissal, allowing Mr. Putney to further pursue his § 1983 action alleging that his Eighth Amendment rights were violated by prison officials’ intentional and malicious deprivation of a mattress for more than four months with no legitimate explanation.

• Antonio v. SSA Sec., Inc., 749 F.3d 227 (4th Cir. 2014): Lead counsel, briefed and argued appeal in a Maryland tort action, resulting in certification of a statutory question of first impression to the Maryland Court of Appeals.

• FTC v. Shomers, 463 F. App’x 828 (11th Cir. 2012): Lead counsel, successfully briefed and argued an interpleader action on behalf of the FTC in an insurance dispute, where the FTC had been substituted for the last policy beneficiary by virtue of a consent decree in another action.

• FTC v. Magazine Solutions, LLC, 432 F. App’x 155 (3d Cir. 2011): Lead counsel, in a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, successfully argued on behalf of the FTC that the agency was entitled to restitution, up to gross revenues received from consumers based on deceptive practices, as ancillary equitable relief under § 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

• FTC v. American Entertainment Distributors, Inc., 433 F. App’x 813 (2011): Lead counsel for the FTC in a case holding that one defendant’s withdrawal of support for consent decree did not require district court to reject decree, and no hearing was necessary for the court to enter final judgment.

State Appellate Courts

• Antonio v. SSA, Security, Inc. 110 A.2d 654 (Md. 2014): Lead counsel, briefed and argued statutory question of first impression certified by the Fourth Circuit about whether § 9-501 of the Maryland Security Guards Act codified the common law doctrine of respondeat superior or contemplated broader liability, in a case where homebuyers sued the security agency who employed security guards responsible for arson.

Professional Activities:

Fellow, American Academy of Appellate Lawyers

Barrister and former Co-Chair of the Membership Committee, Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court

Former Member, Rules Advisory Committee of the United State Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

T: (202) 868-6924

rdeutsch@deutschhunt.com

Degrees

• LL.M. in Advocacy, Georgetown University Law Center, with distinction, 2016

• J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, summa cum laude, 2004

• Ph.D., Economics, Yale University, 1994

• M.Phil., Economics, Yale University, 1993

• M.A., Economics, Yale University, 1993

• M.A., International Relations, Yale University, 1993

• B.A., Economics, Amherst College, cum laude, 1983

Clerkships

• U.S. Supreme Court (Ginsburg, J., 2007-2008)

• Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, J., 2004-2005)

Bar Memberships:

Admitted to practice in the District of Columbia and Maryland, and before the United States Supreme Court, and the United States Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Federal Circuit, and First, Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits.