Skip to main content

Alain P. Mathieu


[email protected]



Alain’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, including contract disputes, business litigation, and government investigations, as well as institutional class action recovery and product liability.  He is an active member of the firm’s Sports & Entertainment practice, where he counsels clients in personal business, branding and licensing, league compliance, investigations, and litigation. He is also an active member of the firm’s interdisciplinary working group focused on the legal and policy implications of emerging artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics technologies. Alain represents clients across numerous industries including, sports & entertainment, financial services, retail and consumer products, healthcare and technology and software. In addition, Alain maintains an active pro bono practice, in which he counsels and represents clients in matters related to domestic and sexual violence, immigration, and civil appeals.

Alain currently serves on the Board of Trustees for Crossroads, a youth empowerment organization focused on unlocking the potential of youth leaders in underserved communities by developing their leadership skills, college and career readiness, commitment to community action, and social responsibility. He has also served on the Action for Boston Community Development (ABCD) Friends Committee since 2017.

At Mintz, Alain serves as the local Boston Chair of MIATTY, the firm’s minority attorney affinity group, and serves on the group’s steering committee. He also chairs the MIATTY Subcommittee on Diversity Recruiting, and serves on Mintz’s Litigation hiring committee.

During law school, Alain served as a judicial intern for the Honorable Gregory C. Flynn of the Waltham District Court and the District Court Appellate Division. In addition, he was a teaching assistant for a first-year criminal law course, and a summer law clerk at Free Speech For People, a legal advocacy organization dedicated to campaign finance reform. During his final year of law school, he became certified as a mediator in accordance with Massachusetts state law and Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts requirements.

Before he attended law school, Alain held several positions at Bowdoin College, his alma mater, including alumni fund associate in the school’s annual giving office. He also served as a legislative intern for US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).


  • Boston College (JD, cum laude)
  • Bowdoin College (BA, cum laude)


  • Alongside co-chair of firm’s Sports and Entertainment Practice, successfully represented multiple high-profile American athletes in resolving pre-litigation disputes.
  • Counsels professional American athletes in connection with personal branding and licensing.
  • Drafted successful dispositive motion on behalf of a Massachusetts-based pharmaceutical company in a multi-million dollar product liability dispute.
  • Counseled major global technology company ahead of its rollout of an artificial intelligence-enabled consumer product.
  • Served as lead junior associate on trial team that successfully secured a seven-figure award before the American Arbitration Association.
  • Representing a Massachusetts-based company and its former board of directors in a litigation against a former shareholder and board member.
  • Served as a key member of team that successfully represented a California-based biotechnology company in resolving a government investigation.
  • Has successfully represented multiple victims of domestic violence at 209A restraining order extension hearings, including a pregnant victim who sought to prevent her abuser from being present at the birth of their child.
  • Representing an asylum applicant seeking refuge pursuant to the Convention Against Torture.

Recognition & Awards

  • The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40 Black Lawyers in Massachusetts (2019)


  • Board Member, Crossroads Massachusetts (2019- present)
  • Friends Committee Member, Action for Boston Community Development (ABCD) (2017 – present)
  • Bowdoin Regional Admissions Volunteer Organization Member, Bowdoin College Admissions Office (2014 – present)
  • Alumni Fund Class Agent, Bowdoin College Office of Annual Giving (2012 – present)


- Creole (Haitian)

- French


Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
In ruling on Defendants’ motion to dismiss in the FX Opt-Outs Action, Judge Schofield narrowed the antitrust claims, denied dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens, and denied dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim.
Read more
Consumer Product Safety Viewpoints Thumbnail
Over the past several weeks, the Firm has received a number inquiries from clients (on both coasts) who are interested in manufacturing or selling test kits, respirators, masks, and other PPE in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with respect to potential liability risks associated with such activities.
Read more
Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
Recently, the United States District Court for the Central District of California denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (“Amended Complaint”) filed in the Toshiba securities litigation. As we previously wrote, in 2016, the district court dismissed the case, holding both that transactions in Toshiba’s unsponsored American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) are not “domestic” transactions as required by Morrison, and also that the plaintiffs’ Japanese law claims must be dismissed due to comity concerns and on forum non conveniens grounds. (link to prior blog). Then, in 2018, the Ninth Circuit reversed this decision, holding that Toshiba ADR trades are domestic, and allowed the defendants to file the Amended Complaint asserting more specific allegations about Toshiba’s connection to the ADR trades. (link to blog on 9th Circuit opinion).
Read more
Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
On November 1, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a summary order rejecting the appeal of an objector to the Foreign Exchange Antitrust Settlement. A few weeks earlier, U.S. District Court Judge Schofield had denied a motion filed by the objector and class counsel seeking an “indicative ruling” on their combined motion for approval of an agreement that would have ended the appeal. These two decision clear the way for the remaining distribution from the settlement fund, which totaled over $2.3 billion dollars.
Read more
Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
Last week, the district court entered an order, granting CalSTRS’ motion for intervention for the limited purpose of tolling the statute of repose. While there is no longer a risk that the complaint will be dismissed (the vast majority of Plaintiffs’ claims have since survived dismissal), CalSTRS has successfully preserved its right to opt out if a class is certified. Allowing CalSTRS (and others) to use motions to intervene to toll the statute of repose rather than forcing such putative class members to choose to forego their rights or file their own opt-out action may preserve resources and encourage efficiency of the courts.
Read more
Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
Years after Plaintiffs brought a federal securities complaint against Petrobras, and more than a year after the case settled for approximately $3 billion, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the unsealing of the majority of documents attached to parties’ summary judgment papers. Cornell University intends to use these documents in an arbitration in Brazil. Not only does Judge Rakoff’s decision come as an important reminder that sealing orders are not intended to last forever, but this decision also demonstrates how a motion to unseal may be used to bypass the traditional requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, frequently invoked by entities seeking to use U.S. discovery in foreign proceedings.
Read more
Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery IICAR Viewpoints Thumbnail
The U.S. Supreme Court denied defendants-appellees’ petition for certiorari in Hagan v. Khoja. As set forth in our prior alert, the executives of the now-defunct biotechnology company, Orexigen, sought review of a Ninth Circuit decision, which not only created a departure from other courts in its narrow-approach to incorporation by reference and judicial notice, but according to the petition, also distinguished itself by being the first Circuit Court of Appeal to find that an issuer owes a duty to update a statement of historical fact that was accurate when made. At issue was whether Orexigen had a duty to disclose data that demonstrated interim results from an obesity drug trial were not as promising as once touted. In opposition to the petition for certiorari, respondent argued, inter alia, that “[e]ven if petitioners were correct . . . that this case implicates whether companies have a duty to update earlier statements of historical fact, the interlocutory posture of this case would make it the worst kind of vehicle for considering that question.”
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail
In the Traffic Monsoon litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that the enforcement provisions of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act reach Traffic Monsoon’s sales to customers outside of the United States. The implications of this decision are significant. This is the first Circuit Court decision to interpret Section 929P(b) of Dodd-Frank, and the first to adopt the position that Dodd-Frank limited Morrison’s application to allow for the enforcement provisions of the 1933 and 1934 Acts to apply extraterritorially. As a result, the decision may result in future decisions by the SEC to allow for holders of common shares to be eligible for recovery in connection with fair funds, rather than limiting eligible parties to holders of shares of American Depositary Shares or Receipts (ADR’s), a limitation the SEC imposed in the Fair Fund established for investors in BP. Recently, Traffic Monsoon has requested a stay of the Tenth Circuit's mandate while it prepares a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court.
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail

Judge Rakoff Highlights the Financial Risk to Objectors of Class Settlements

October 23, 2018 | | By Joel Rothman, Ellen Shapiro, Kevin Mortimer, Alain Mathieu

On August 15, 2018, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York awarded an objector to the Petrobras class settlement nearly $12,000 in attorneys’ fees (click here for the Order).  The objector had asked the Court for almost $200,000 to cover 231.7 hours of legal work. Approximately one month later, Judge Rakoff sanctioned another objector to the Petrobas class settlement (click here for the Order). In the September Order, Judge Rakoff issued a grave warning to future objectors and reminded counsel that it is the Court’s duty to “safeguard the ability of objectors to protect class members from abusive settlements while in turn protect[] class members from being abused by the objectors themselves.
Read more