Pratik A. Shah
Private practice · Washington, D.C. · Assistant to the Solicitor General, Attorney · argued OT 2010–2023
13arguments since OT 2010
6–5record (side argued for), 55%
49Justice remarks faced per argument (open period; all advocates 47)
62%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 2023 | Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. | Respondent | Attorney | Lost | 60 | 56% |
| OT 2022 | Lac Du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 70 | 64% |
| OT 2021 | Johnson v. Arteaga-martinez | Respondent | Attorney | Lost | 55 | 45% |
| OT 2018 | Azar v. Allina Health Services | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 46 | 53% |
| OT 2017 | Patchak v. Zinke | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 27 | 86% |
| OT 2012 | Adrian Moncrieffe v. Eric H. Holder, JR., Attorney General | Respondent | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Lost | 53 | 67% |
| OT 2012 | Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. et al. | Amicus | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 31 | 56% |
| OT 2012 | Steven Alan Levin v. United States et al. | Respondent | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Lost | 59 | – |
| OT 2011 | Lynwood D. Hall, Et Ux. v. United States | Respondent | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 42 | 67% |
| OT 2011 | Margaret Minneci et al. v. Richard Lee Pollard et al. | Amicus (for petitioner) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 11 | 50% |
| OT 2010 | United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation | Petitioner | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 33 | 69% |
| OT 2010 | Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. et al. v. James Siracusano et al. | Amicus (for respondent) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 16 | 53% |
| OT 2010 | Jose Tolentino v. New York | Amicus | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 18 | 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).