header-logo header-logo

Andy Roth—Cooley

04 May 2016
Issue: 7696 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail

Prominent cybersecurity & privacy partner joins firm

Cooley is growing its privacy & data protection group with the addition of Andy Roth, who joins the firm as a partner based in New York. Andy arrives from Dentons, where he was co-chair of the firm’s global privacy & cybersecurity group; prior to that he was chief privacy officer at American Express.

“Andy’s unique background, centered around the intersection of law, technology and security, will allow him to provide clients with strategies for accelerating the entry of new products and services to market in a manner that protects the privacy rights of individuals and companies from unnecessary risk,” said Michael Rhodes, co-chair of Cooley’s privacy & data protection practice.

Andy specialises in advising on complex legal and operational issues raised by cutting-edge technology. He regularly counsels clients on digital issues such as data breach, crisis management, cross-border transfers, secure architecture, contracts and disclosures, compliance and risk management, payments and e-commerce as well as privacy and cybersecurity litigation.

Andy also has experience dealing with regulators at the federal, state and international level. He recently represented defendants in the FCC's first cybersecurity enforcement action and will join Cooley’s leading FCC regulatory team focused on privacy and cybersecurity matters.

Andy is a prominent thought leader in fintech with expertise in digital payments, virtual currencies and cybersecurity. He is a frequent commentator on the legal implications of Bitcoin, having settled the first Bitcoin-mining case and serving as pro bono counsel to the Bitcoin Foundation.

“Cooley is the go-to firm for innovative companies leveraging technology to disrupt established markets," Andy says. “The firm is uniquely positioned to protect and guide clients as they take products and services to the global market. I’m looking forward to contributing to this exceptional team.”

Nominations for the Halsbury Legal Awards 2016, in association with NLJ, are now open. Visit the site to view all the categories and enter online. #Halsbury2016

Issue: 7696 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll