In a significant move within the legal and technology sectors, Gil Ohana, who held a prominent position at Cisco Systems, has announced his departure from the tech giant. Ohana revealed that he will be joining the antitrust practice at Davis Polk, a prestigious law firm with a strong presence in Northern California.
Ohana will be based in Davis Polk‘s Northern California office, situated in the heart of Menlo Park, Silicon Valley’s epicenter. His decision to transition to Davis Polk marks a notable shift in his career trajectory, as he moves from a leading technology corporation to a prominent legal practice renowned for its expertise in antitrust matters.
Expressing gratitude for his time at Cisco, Ohana acknowledged the support and camaraderie of his colleagues and friends within the company. In a statement, he remarked, “I leave Cisco full of gratitude to many colleagues and friends throughout the company, including in Cisco Legal and in the Corporate Development, Strategy, and Acquisition Integration teams that I supported in what seems like hundreds of acquisitions, investments, and divestitures. Working with you was a privilege.”
Read more: Chinese Watchdog Approves Cisco’s $4.5B Acacia Deal
Renowned for his expertise in antitrust and intellectual property matters, Ohana is recognized for his contributions to standard-essential patents in wired and wireless networking and communications. He has been an active participant in discussions on intellectual property rights (IPR) policies at leading standards development organizations including ANSI, ETSI, IEEE-SA, ITU-T, IETF, and OneM2m.
Moreover, Ohana has been instrumental in advising on the formation and operation of various informal standards development organizations engaged in the Internet of Things (IoT) and patent pools. His comprehensive understanding of antitrust laws and intellectual property regulations has positioned him as a sought-after authority in the field.
At Davis Polk, Ohana is set to bring his wealth of experience and expertise to bolster the firm’s antitrust practice further.
Source: Davis Polk
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand