John K. Roche Partner

Cases in which John has been involved include:

• In re Subpoena to: Reddit, Inc., 24-mc-80005, 2024 WL 477519 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2024) (declining to enforce subpoena as violative of the First Amendment).
• Facebook, Inc. v. State, 254 N.J. 329 (2023) (affirming orders quashing warrants for 30 days of prospective communications as violative of the Wiretap Act and Fourth Amendment).
• United States v. Glenn, 341 F.R.D. 217 (N.D. Ohio 2022) (vacating orders for contents of deceased victim’s social media communications as violative of Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) and Stored Communications Act (SCA)).
• Davison v. Twitter, Inc., 370 F. Supp. 3d 621 (E.D. Va. 2019) (dismissing First Amendment claims against service provider due to lack of standing or state action), affirmed by 774 Fed. Appx. 162 (4th Cir. 2019).
• Facebook, Inc. v. Wint, 199 A.3d 625 (D.C. 2019) (criminal defendant cannot obtain communications content from a service provider under the Stored Communications Act SCA)).
• Kline v. Facebook, Inc., No. 150022/2018, 2019 WL 185767 (N.Y. Co. Sup. Jan. 10, 2019) (service provider not subject to personal jurisdiction in New York).
• Ciabattoni v. Teamsters Local 326, No.: N15C-04-059 VLM, 2018 WL 2418388 (Del. Super. May 29, 2018) (First Amendment prevented effort to unmask anonymous internet user).
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena Issued to Twitter, Inc., No. 3:17-mc-40-M-BN, 2017 WL 9485553 (N.D. Texas, Nov. 7, 2017), adopted by 2018 WL 2421867 (N.D. Tex., May 3, 2018) (partially quashing grand jury subpoena issued to service provider on First Amendment grounds).
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena Issued to Twitter, Inc., No. 3:17-mc-40-M-BN, 2017 WL 9287146 (N.D. Texas, Sept. 22, 2017), adopted by 2017 WL 9287147 (N.D. Tex., Oct. 19, 2017) (vacating gag order issued to service provider on statutory and First Amendment grounds).
• In re Facebook, Inc. v. United States of America, Nos. 17-SS-388, 17-SS-389, 17-SS-390 (D.C. Court of Appeals, 2017) (successful appeal of order denying motion to vacate gag order related to search warrants in investigation of inauguration day riots in District of Columbia).
• Bennett v. Google Inc., No. 1:16-cv-02283 (TFH), 2017 WL 2692607 (D.D.C. June 21, 2017) (granting motion to dismiss defamation claim under the Communications Decency Act (CDA)), affirmed by 882 F.3d 1163 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
• Beyond Systems, Inc. v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 972 F. Supp. 2d 748 (D. Md. 2013) (after two-week advisory jury trial, granting client’s motion for summary judgment defeating plaintiff’s $600 million “spam” email claims), affirmed by 777 F.3d 712 (4th Cir. 2015).
• CTIA - Wireless Ass'n v. Telecommunications Regulatory Bd. of Puerto Rico, 2012 WL 3151377 (D. Puerto Rico 2012) (denying opponent’s motion to dismiss and subsequently granting client’s request for permanent injunction of state law under the Stored Communications Act (SCA)), affirmed by 752 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2014).
• People v. Harris, 949 N.Y.S.2d 590 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct., 2012) (case of first impression granting in part and denying in part communications provider’s motion to quash subpoena for user records).
• CRGT, Inc. v. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., 2012 WL 3776369 (E.D. Va. 2012) (case of first impression upholding defense contractor’s reliance on Federal Officer Removal Statute) 
• Dodge v. CDW-Government, Inc., 415 Fed. Appx. 485 (4^th 2011) (victory in breach of contract/employment action). 
• Qwest Corp. v. Colorado Public Utilities Com'n,656 F.3d 1093 (10th Cir. 2011) (victory in action under the Telecommunications Act). 
• Qwest Corp. v. Arizona Corp. Com’n,567 F.3d 1109 (9^th 2009) (victory in action under the Telecommunications Act). 
• Jayne v. Sprint PCS, 2009 WL 426117 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (granting client’s motion to dismiss § 1983 claims under the Stored Communications Act (SCA)). 

Privacy, Security, Internet, and Communications Law

John’s practice includes litigation and regulatory compliance counseling with regard to privacy, internet, and communications issues. He helps manage and oversee perhaps the largest subpoena, court order, and search warrant compliance program in the country for numerous communications providers (e.g., phone companies, email services, wireless providers, social networks, etc.) regarding issues related to the federal Stored Communications Act (SCA), Wiretap Act, Pen-Trap Statute, Telecommunications Act, and Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA).

John is highly experienced in a host of other areas ranging from Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) to the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act, the Communications Decency Act (CDA), and telemarketing laws.

John also assists clients in their response to computer intrusions and theft of trade secrets, including actions related to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and state computer intrusion laws. He has represented clients before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and numerous state commissions in privacy-related investigations and telecommunications matters.

Uncrewed Aerial Systems (UAS)

John has counseled UAS clients on privacy issues, including the development of UAS privacy policies. He has represented a major UAS client in a successful multi-stakeholder proceeding before the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) that resulted in the adoption of voluntary privacy best practices regarding commercial and private UAS use in the national airspace.

Employment Law

John has counseled clients and litigated on their behalf regarding employment-related matters, including wage claims, restrictive covenant and trade secret litigation, security policies, and employee privacy issues. These matters include briefing and arguing a successful appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit related to a wage dispute for a major client in Virginia.

Pro Bono

John maintains a significant pro bono practice, litigating matters to assist survivors of domestic violence. He has been a recipient of the firm’s prestigious Pro Bono Leadership Award for his work on behalf of domestic violence survivors in Virginia state court.