Experience

Thakur v. Trump Litigation: Legal Challenge to Termination of Federal Grants to UC System

This class action lawsuit was filed in federal court in San Francisco in June 2025 on behalf of University of California researchers whose grants were abruptly terminated without any individualized consideration or process, pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Orders.  The lawsuit asserts that the government’s grant terminations violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the class members’ constitutional rights, including their First Amendment right to free speech and Fifth Amendment right to due process.

On June 23, U.S. District Court (Northern District of California) Judge Rita F. Lin issued a class-wide preliminary injunction, ordering the government to cease grant terminations under President Trump’s and the agencies’ unlawful directives, and to reinstate previously-terminated research grants from the EPA, NSF, and NEH across the UC system.

On August 21, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the federal government’s motion to stay Judge Lin’s preliminary injunction order. By its ruling, the appellate panel kept in force the district court’s preliminary injunction, ensuring that grant funding will continue to flow while the government’s appeal of the injunction continues. 

On September 22, the District Court issued a second injunction, ordering the government to cease grant terminations by DOD, DOT, and NIH, and to reinstate grants previously terminated by those agencies.  

On November 24,  plaintiffs filed (1) motion for leave to file third amended complaint, adding class plaintiffs with affected DOE grants, and (2) motion for preliminary injunction seeking reinstatement of these grants, similar to the prior injunctions granted against EPA, NSF, NEH, DOD, DOT, and NIH.

On December 23, the Ninth Circuit issued an Amended Order, reversing a limited part of what it decided in August 2025 in upholding the District Court’s determination that the Trump administration violated the law in terminating grants to UC researchers. The Ninth Circuit again found that the Trump administration violated the First Amendment in cutting off grants based on the perceived viewpoints of the research. The District Court’s order reinstating these grants to members of the Equity Termination Class remains in effect.

The Ninth Circuit, however, determined that another set of claims under the federal Administrative Procedure Act likely must go to the Court of Federal Claims rather than the federal district court. The Ninth Circuit thus stayed the District Court’s order reinstating grants to the Form Termination Class. At this point, this applies only to grants from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Endowment of the Humanities that are not also covered by the Equity Termination Class.

On December 29, plaintiffs sought reconsideration of the Ninth Circuit panel’s conclusion that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the claims under the Administrative Procedure Act.

On January 30, the District Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint and denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Provisional Class Certification as to the Department of Energy. For Plaintiff’s Preliminary Injunction Motion, the District Court stated that there is not enough information in the record to support a finding that the terminations likely violated the Equal Protection Clause. The District Court concurrently issued an order setting a case schedule to proceed directly to cross-motions for summary judgment on the equal production claim after production of the administrative record and discovery.

On February 3, plaintiffs filed their Third Amended Complaint.

On February 23, the Ninth Circuit denied Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration or reconsideration en banc.

Copies of the complaint, key court orders, and legal briefs in the litigation may be accessed here.

Challenge to State Agency Approval of Industrial Infrastructure Project

Represented a municipality challenging a state commission’s approval of an industrial desalination facility. Prepared a petition for writ of review to the state’s highest court and led briefing in response to extensive opposition filings.

Groundwater Contamination Multi-District Litigation

Defended a major chemical distributor in decades‑long coordinated groundwater contamination litigation involving dozens of cases and extensive fact and expert discovery. Took or defended more than 40 depositions, prepared summary judgment motions, and helped achieve repeated dismissals and favorable settlements.

Contaminated Property Cost Recovery Litigation

Represented a national transportation company in multi‑party litigation in state and federal court concerning historical industrial contamination. Prepared and defended corporate representatives, worked extensively with expert witnesses, and played a key role in trial preparation, including motions in limine, witness examinations, and evidentiary strategy.

Federal CERCLA Contribution and Cost Recovery Action

Represented a large consumer products company in CERCLA litigation regarding legacy industrial contamination at a former manufacturing site. Drafted successful motion practice narrowing claims, prepared mediation briefing, and negotiated settlement terms.

Environmental Enforcement Actions

Represented companies in pre‑litigation and government‑initiated enforcement actions under the Clean Water Act and Proposition 65. Work included drafting persuasive responses that avoided litigation, coordinating technical analyses, and negotiating favorable resolutions. Achieved a “walk-away” of a threatened consumer product class action demand through pre-litigation advocacy.

Subrogation Jury Trial

Jury trial for a global automaker in an equitable subrogation action. Developed trial themes, deposed corporate and expert witnesses, prepared pre-trial and trial motions, and conducted direct examination of key expert witness at trial.

Investigations & Technical Expertise

Managed internal investigations relating to environmental practices, including interviews, document reviews, and coordination with consultants. Strong scientific grounding (biology background) enables effective examination of expert witnesses and analysis of environmental data.

Regulatory Compliance for Mining and Industrial Sites

Advise clients on compliance with cleanup and abatement orders, management of mining waste, water rights, historical resource protections, and remediation strategy.