Stephen A. Hylas

Stephen A. Hylas

Stephen Hylas is a litigation associate in the San Francisco office of Munger, Tolles & Olson.

Mr. Hylas focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation, with an emphasis on antitrust, intellectual property and employee mobility matters. He has also provided strategic advice to clients in the healthcare and technology industries on numerous complex issues relating to trade secrets, employment and intellectual property.

In his practice, Mr. Hylas has handled a range of trial and appellate cases in state and federal courts throughout the country. In state court, he has drafted successful summary judgment motions and appellate briefs in matters ranging from employment class actions to unlawful detainers. Mr. Hylas has also handled numerous cases in federal court, including drafting pleadings and successful motions to dismiss in complex antitrust and securities cases.  

Mr. Hylas maintains an active pro bono practice. In 2020, he successfully argued in the Ninth Circuit on behalf of amici in a case challenging disability accommodations in T-Mobile Park, home of the Seattle Mariners. He also played a key role in petitioning for and obtaining a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of incarcerated persons challenging conditions relating to COVID-19 in the Orange County jail. Mr. Hylas is also a presence in the local legal community, co-leading the San Francisco office’s annual Food From the Bar campaign, a deeply impactful annual fundraiser that unites legal professionals across the country in combating child hunger.

Before joining the firm, Mr. Hylas clerked for Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judge R. Gary Klausner of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Mr. Hylas earned his J.D., magna cum laude and Order of the Coif, from New York University School of Law. During law school, he served as notes editor for the NYU Law Review and was named a Pomeroy Scholar, an award given to the top ten students in the first-year class. His student note, Final Agency Action in the Administrative Procedure Act, has been cited in multiple law reviews and in an amicus brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court. In addition, Mr. Hylas interned during law school in the civil fraud section of the U.S. Attorneys’ Office for the Southern District of New York, and for Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.   

Before law school, Mr. Hylas graduated with a B.S., magna cum laude, in international politics from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, where he served as a reporter for the student newspaper.


Key Representations

  • AbbVie in antitrust litigation brought by multiple major pharmaceutical wholesalers challenging three separate patent settlements as “pay for delay” arrangements and three patent assertions as “sham litigation.”
  • Intel, Inc. in successfully obtaining voluntary dismissal of a securities action in the Southern District of New York that challenged Intel's proxy disclosures regarding executive compensation.
  • Applied Materials, Inc. in litigation filed by ASM America, Inc., in an Arizona federal court that sought to enjoin a former ASM employee, Bok-Heon Kim, from working for Applied.
  • A landlord in Napa County, California, in winning an unlawful detainer eviction action against a corporate tenant on summary judgment and thereafter receiving an award of over $2 million in attorneys’ fees.
  • The ACLU of Orange County in a significant victory in a lawsuit challenging the Orange County Sheriff’s response to COVID-19 at the Orange County Jail. The judge ordered that the two named plaintiff-petitioners be released immediately, and that the sheriff immediately develop and implement a plan to facilitate adequate social distancing.
  • A set of California healthcare companies in obtaining summary judgment in a wage-and-hour class action in Los Angeles Superior Court.
  • A major healthcare organization in providing strategic advice on important intellectual property questions.
  • A technology company in providing litigation risk analysis relating to a potential transaction.
  • A Salvadoran minor in successfully obtaining Special Immigrant Juvenile Status.
  • Disability rights organizations as amicus curiae in an ADA case before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.