Michael L. Charlson

Partner

Shareholder Litigation & Enforcement

“I like to get my hands dirty and really learn my cases thoroughly. I try to understand how the situation in which the client finds itself could have happened. And I’m pretty good at creating a narrative so that laypeople who have no familiarity with a very complicated business or technology can understand the matter.”

Michael Charlson

Overview

Michael Charlson handles complex litigation matters across a range of substantive areas, although he focuses his practice on securities class action, corporate governance and shareholder derivative litigation and related counseling. For more than 30 years, Michael has represented corporations, officers, directors and other constituencies, usually in lawsuits and investigations related to allegations that they have issued false and misleading statements or mismanaged the company. His clients span industries, from the most cutting-edge biotech innovators to gravel pit operators, and everything in between. And they are often facing billions of dollars of damages and serious threats to the enterprise’s continued existence. Michael also co-led the team that secured a jury verdict for defendants (including his client, the former CEO) in In re JDS Uniphase Securities Litigation, one of only a handful of securities class actions that have gone to trial.

Read More

Experience

  • Represents the Audit Committee of a public multinational technology company involved in an ongoing investigation before the SEC and DOJ to conduct an independent investigation into the company’s compliance with the FCPA in Russia and four other countries

  • (9th Cir.); (N.D. Cal.); (Cal. Super. – Santa Clara Cnty.) – Secured on appeal affirmance of dismissal of a securities class action complaint against VIVUS, Inc. and two senior officers, arising from disappointing FDA action on a drug approval application; represented defendant officers and directors also in related shareholder derivative litigations in federal and state courts in California

  • (Del. Ch.); (W.D. Wash.); (Wash. Super. – King Cnty.) — Represented a biotechnology company, and various officers and directors, in a consolidated securities class action in federal court in Washington State, and in related individual securities litigation and shareholder derivative litigations in state and federal court in Washington State and in Delaware, relating generally to missed revenue guidance, the withdrawal of financial guidance and alleged insider trading; all litigation was settled favorably

  • (Tax) – Represented taxpayers in U.S. Tax Court and other IRS proceedings over allegations that the individuals and their entities engaged in improper tax shelter transactions

  • (D. Md.) – Defended officers and directors of a biopharmaceutical company in connection with allegedly improper grants of equity incentive compensation

Expand All

Credentials

Education

  • University of California, Berkeley School of Law, J.D., 1985 (Order of the Coif; Articles Editor, California Law Review)
  • Stanford University, M.S., Biological Sciences, 1981
  • Stanford University, B.S., Biological Sciences, 1981

Admissions

  • California
  • New York
  • District of Columbia

Expand All

Recognitions

  • Chambers USA, Litigation: Securities (California), 2016−2019, 2021–2026
  • Legal 500 U.S., Shareholder Litigation, 2014 and 2015; Energy Litigation, 2015; Dispute Resolution: Securities Litigation: Defense, 2016, 2017, 2019–2026; Corporate Investigations and White-Collar Criminal Defense, 2019; M&A Litigation: Defense, 2020; Dispute Resolution: M&A Litigation: Defense, 2020–2022, 2024 and 2025
  • Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America, Lawdragon, 2023–2026
  • The Best Lawyers in America© (BL Rankings, LLC), Litigation–Securities (San Francisco), 2023–2027
  • Selected to the Northern California Super Lawyers list, Super Lawyers® (Thomson Reuters), 2006, 2010–2020, 2023, and 2025
Insights

Client Alerts

Supreme Court Rejects Financial Harm Requirement for SEC Disgorgement

On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an attempt to limit the ability of the U.S. Securities and …

June 9, 2026

June 9, 2026 • 3-minute read

Client Alerts

Two High Court Securities Cases Could Clarify Pleading Rules

In granting certiorari in Facebook Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank and Nvidia Corp. v. E. Ohman J:or Fonder AB, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled its intention to provide further guidance concerning application of the heightened standard for pleading private securities fraud claims mandated by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.

October 4, 2024 • Published by Law360 on October 3, 2024

October 4, 2024 • 1-minute read

ACI’s 15th Forum on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Background Image

Client Alerts

SCOTUS To Focus on the Securities Fraud Pleading Standard in Two Cases Next Term

In a pair of orders issued this month, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled plans to provide further guidance in its upcoming Fall term concerning application of the heightened standard for pleading securities fraud claims mandated by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PSLRA”).

July 1, 2024

July 1, 2024 • 6-minute read

The Supreme Court “Finally” Grants Review of LGBTQ Title VII Cases Background Decorative Image

Client Alerts

Out from the Shadows: The SEC Succeeds on Shadow Insider Trading Theory

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) caught the attention of the corporate and investment world in August 2021 when it filed an insider trading action against biopharmaceutical company employee Matthew Panuwat based on a “shadow trading” theory.

April 15, 2024

April 15, 2024 • 4-minute read

The Securities and Exchange Commission: a Fort Worth Regional Office Update Background Image
News & Achievements