Deepak Gupta
Private practice · Washington, D.C. · Attorney · argued OT 2010–2024
8arguments since OT 2010
4–4record (side argued for), 50%
50Justice remarks faced per argument (open period; all advocates 47)
60%of those remarks read as doubt by Jev (all advocates 63%)
Arguments by term
Side wonSide lostPending / unclear
Arguments
| Term | Case | Side | Role | Result | Remarks faced | Doubt (Jev) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OT 2024 | Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 57 | 59% |
| OT 2024 | Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 37 | 39% |
| OT 2024 | Nvidia Corp. v. E. Ohman J:Or Fonder Ab | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 54 | 41% |
| OT 2020 | Ford Motor Company v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 32 | 40% |
| OT 2018 | Smith v. Berryhill | Amicus (for respondent) | Attorney | Lost | 47 | 83% |
| OT 2016 | Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman | Petitioner | Attorney | Won | 60 | 71% |
| OT 2012 | Mark J. Mcburney et al. v. Nathaniel L. Young, Deputy Commissioner and Director, Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement et al. | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 69 | 69% |
| OT 2010 | AT&T Mobility LLC v. Vincent Concepcion | Respondent | Attorney | Lost | 41 | 74% |
Names, roles and sides from each transcript's list of appearances; results from the Supreme Court Database (did the side argued for win). Remarks faced: Justice turns of five words or more right after this advocate spoke, open period only. Doubt: TypeSafe's Jev reading of those remarks (an experiment, available where our research run covered the case).