Jeff Fisher focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation in both state and federal court. Mr. Fisher specializes in class actions, restrictive covenant, and trade secret litigation. Mr. Fisher frequently represents defendants in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) and data breach class actions. Mr. Fisher also regularly advises and represents companies in disputes involving trade secret misappropriation, software licensing and implementation, misuse of confidential information, and enforcement of restrictive covenants.
Mr. Fisher has represented regional and Fortune 500 companies in class action litigation, breach of contract disputes, and complex fraud cases. He has substantial experience litigating cases brought under federal and state statutes, including the TCPA, RICO, the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, the False Claims Act, and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Mr. Fisher has practiced in numerous federal, state, and appellate courts and has represented parties in private arbitration and mediation. Mr. Fisher has experience with all aspects of the litigation process, including pre-litigation investigations, motion practice, complex document discovery, depositions, dispositive motions, settlement negotiations, hearings, and trial.
Mr. Fisher is also devoted to pro-bono and community work. In 2015, Mr. Fisher received Kilpatrick Townsend’s Pro Bono Excellence Award for his representation of a transgender Mexican woman seeking asylum in the United States. In 2014, Mr. Fisher was part of a team that represented 17 guest workers from India alleging human trafficking claims against a large marine construction firm. Mr. Fisher is on the executive board of AJC ACCESS and the steering committee of the Atlanta Black-Jewish Coalition.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Fisher clerked for the Honorable Judge Harold L. Murphy of the Northern District of Georgia. While in law school, Mr. Fisher was elected to the Order of the Coif and served as an Articles Editor (2009-2010) and as a member of the Editorial Board (2008-2009) of the Georgia Law Review.
Mr. Fisher was recognized in 2018, 2019 and 2020 as a Georgia "Rising Star" for Business Litigation by Super Lawyers magazine. He was recognized in 2020 by Daily Report's Georgia Legal Awards as being an attorney "On the Rise", which honors Georgia's most promising lawyers under the age of 40. Mr. Fisher was also named one of Georgia Trend's "40 Under 40" for 2020. He was recognized in 2021 as one of the “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” for Commercial Litigation, Intellectual Property Law, and Technology Law by The Best Lawyers in America®.
Consumer Class Actions
Represented payment processor in series of lawsuits arising out of data breach, including consumer class action.
Represented insurance provider in federal class action lawsuits brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Represented fleet company in federal class action lawsuit brought under the TCPA.
Trade Secrets and Restrictive Covenants
Represented healthcare staffing company in lawsuits enforcing restrictive covenants against former employees, obtained interlocutory injunctions.
Represented construction company in cases alleging trade secret misappropriation and RICO violations against former employees and new employer.
Represented software company in lawsuit alleging trade secret misappropriation. AirWatch LLC v. Mobile Iron, Inc., 1:12-CV-3571-JEC, 2013 WL 4757491, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 4, 2013).
Represented employees against allegations of trade secret misappropriation and breach of restrictive covenants by construction company.
Represented consumer product company in lawsuit alleging trade secret misappropriation against competitor.
Represented industrial aluminum company against allegations of trade secret misappropriation by manufacturer.
Fraud and RICO
Represented national telecommunications company in nationwide series of lawsuits alleging improper billing of customer fees. Bellsouth Telecommunications, LLC v. Cobb Cty., 305 Ga. 144, 144, 824 S.E.2d 233, 234 (2019).
Represented law firm against lawsuit alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Rowe v. Gary, 703 Fed. Appx. 777 (11th Cir. 2017).
Represented healthcare debt collector against class action lawsuits alleging RICO and fraud.
Software Implementation Disputes
Represented fintech company in contract dispute with software provider.
Represented healthcare software provider in contract dispute with client.
Insights View All
University of Georgia School of Law, J.D. (2010) magna cum laude, Order of the Coif
University of Pennsylvania, B.A., Political Science (2007) with distinction, cum laude
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (2012)
Supreme Court of Georgia (2015)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (2016)
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia - Honorable Harold L. Murphy (Aug 2010-Aug 2012)
Federal Bar Association, Member
Georgia Asylum & Immigration Network, Board Member
AJC ACCESS, Executive Board Member
Atlanta Black-Jewish Coalition, Steering Member
Project Understanding, Participant
Anti-Defamation League — Glass Leadership Institute, Participant
Atlanta Young Jewish Attorneys Network, Founding Member
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.