The Evolution of the Intersection of Technology and Law in the Bay Area

In this Pharmaceutical Executive video interview, Matthew Yelovich, partner at Cleary Gottlieb, discusses the appeals of both Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes and the company’s COO, Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani. The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the duo’s convictions after considering questions about expert and lay testimony. Yelovich emphasizes the importance of careful vetting of statements to investors and the public, especially in tech-driven companies. The conversation also explores the complexities of sentencing in fraud cases, the importance of corporate governance and accountability, and his transition in late-2024 from federal prosecutor to a role at Cleary Gottlieb.

Pharmaceutical Executive: You transitioned from the US Attorney's Office to Cleary Gottlieb in October 2024. How has your experience as a federal prosecutor, particularly handling the appeal response in this case, influenced your perspective in your new role at Cleary?
Matthew Yelovich: What drew me to Cleary was its top shelf enforcement and litigation practice, which handles some of the most complex challenges that our clients face globally and looks for bespoke solutions to those issues. That was a really enticing practice to join, and it combines that with this incredibly collaborative culture. People are helpful, kind, supportive, and jump in to help with problems and talk through them in a way that is fairly unique in the top shelf firm profile. That combination was really interesting and attractive to me. Coming from the US Attorney's office, one of the things that really makes that work enjoyable is team spirit, where you're collaborating on things, helping each other out, and doing so at a really high level with really complicated problems. I saw some of those same traits in Cleary Gottlieb, so the transition has been terrific. I couldn't ask for better colleagues and better clients, and I'm gratified to be here.

PE: Given your experience in the Bay Area, and your move to Cleary's Bay Area office, how do you see the intersection of technology and law evolving in this region, especially in light of cases like this one?
Yelovich: This case is an example that the government will not be afraid to bring investigations or enforcement actions in so called fake-it-till-you-make-it situations. Companies would do well to have folks on staff or outside who they're talking to who know the subtleties in this area, the choices technology companies face in this space, and who have credibility with the regulators and enforcement agencies. I think that is a really important part of minimizing exposure and reducing risk at the investigation stage. I see this case as emblematic of the government's approach to this area and enforcement interest on the fake-it-till-you-make-it frauds.