1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Jason Stiehl

Jason Stiehl

Partner | He/Him/His
Partner | He/Him/His
anN0aWVobEBjcm93ZWxsLmNvbQ==
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Balance and comprehension are Jason Stiehl’s strengths. Splitting his practice between class action defense and trade secret protection, Jason immerses himself in the business of his clients. With a depth of understanding and appreciation for the risks and growth strategies in his clients’ markets, he defends the assets and brands most valuable to his clients before trouble strikes.

Jason is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Chicago office, where he is a member of the firm’s Litigation and Advertising and Brand Protection groups. Jason is an experienced trial lawyer with a nationwide practice in federal and state courts focusing on complex litigation, consumer class actions, and advertising disputes. He serves clients in the retail, food and beverage, pharmaceutical and medical equipment, advertising, and technology sectors defending allegations related to consumer fraud, false labeling and deceptive practices, and Lanham Act violations. As a leading consumer class action defense lawyer, Jason also defends clients in matters involving the regulatory alphabet soup. His experience includes defense and counseling regarding the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and navigating the myriad varying state consumer protection statutes, including California’s Legal Remedies Act and the California Consumer Privacy Act. Jason was recognized for his pivotal role in the dismissal of three major consumer fraud class actions by Crain’s Chicago Business in their annual 2025 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys list.

In addition, Jason represents clients in complex litigation matters involving corporate espionage, restrictive covenants, trade secrets and other intellectual property claims, general unfair competition, and complex disputes over post-acquisition escrows and earnouts. His cases have involved recovering and protecting international brand assets in Asia, South America, Canada, and Europe using cross-border resources to secure his clients’ intellectual property, including automotive, industrial, and food manufacturing technologies. Jason has been recognized by his peers and clients for his ability to understand and immerse himself in his clients’ businesses and develop a fulsome strategy to protect their most valuable assets. Jason has obtained and defended preliminary and permanent injunction matters across the country and has taken multiple cases through trial and appeal.

Career & Education

    • Chicago-Kent College of Law, J.D., with honors, 2001
    • Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas, B.S., in biology and sociology, 1997
      (Alpha Kappa Delta)
    • Chicago-Kent College of Law, J.D., with honors, 2001
    • Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas, B.S., in biology and sociology, 1997
      (Alpha Kappa Delta)

    • Illinois
    • Supreme Court of the United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Trial Bar
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
    • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
    • Illinois
    • Supreme Court of the United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Trial Bar
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
    • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee

  • Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Member, Chicago Bar Association
    • Class Action Chair, Chicago Bar Association, 2019-2020
    • Member, Illinois State Bar Association
    • Board Member, Friends of the Children-Chicago

    Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Member, Chicago Bar Association
    • Class Action Chair, Chicago Bar Association, 2019-2020
    • Member, Illinois State Bar Association
    • Board Member, Friends of the Children-Chicago
[M]ake sure your contracts are properly buttoned up, your oversight is proper, and that you know what every arm of your company is doing.

— Jason Stiehl, Law360, “Three Takeaways From the First BIPA Trial” (Oct. 13, 2022)

Jason 's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.26.25

Ninth Circuit Affirms that CIPA Only Applies to Third-Party Eavesdropping

Crowell attorneys have closely monitored developments related to the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). In particular, we have watched plaintiffs attempt to extend this wiretapping law to encompass website chatbot communications that are managed by third parties....

View All Insights

Representative Matters

  • Defend technology company in wiretapping claim under California Penal Code 632 in Southern District of California.
  • Obtained Dismissal of wiretapping claim under California Penal Code 632 for multi-brand consumer product company.
  • Defend CPG/FMCG company in false advertising and Magnusson-Moss warranty claim.
  • Defend iconic consumer product manufacturer in false advertising and Magnusson-Moss warranty claim.

Representative Commercial Dispute Experience:

  • Prosecuted and defended claims of Lanham Act violation for representations regarding performance and market positioning
  • Pursued injunctive relief under Lanham Act to prevent false and misleading advertising claims by competitors
  • Successfully defended Fortune 500 company against tortious interference and breach of contract claim related to post-acquisition earnout dispute
  • Obtained permanent injunction against competitor, resulting in acquisition of competitor’s assets to resolve dispute
  • Obtained positive result for client regarding dispute over escrowed funds post-acquisition related to disputed metric achievements 
  • Routinely counsel client, and pursue or defend litigation, involving corporate breakups
  • Successfully pursued buy/sell covenant cases on behalf of various medical device manufacturing companies
  • Successfully pursued buy/sell covenant cases on behalf of various logistic companies

Representative Class Action Experience:

  • Defended Fortune 500 management company in privacy litigation related to California Consumer Privacy Act resulting in quick and positive resolution
  • Defended Fortune 500 food manufacturer related to false labeling claims as to specific ingredients resulting in quick and positive resolution
  • Defended Fortune 500 pet food retailer related to false labeling claims (all natural) under state deceptive trade practices statute resulting in dismissal of all claims
  • Defended Fortune 500 clothing retailer related to false labeling claims (quality of materials) under state deceptive trade practices resulting in dismissal of all claims
  • Defended Fortune 500 clothing retailer related to false labeling claims (benefits of product) under state deceptive trade practices resulting in dismissal of all claims
  • Defended Fortune 500 restaurant brand related to gratuity and menu labeling claims resulting in dismissal of all claims
  • Defended multiple waste management companies related to deceptive fee claims
  • Defended cannabis company in claims related to Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims resulting in quick resolution and avoidance of litigation
  • Successfully defeated class certification on behalf of entertainment brand related to claims brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
  • Resolved numerous qui tam whistleblower suits related to shipping charges for various retailers
  • Defended over 15 class actions across the country, including banks, sports teams, theaters, restaurants and grocery stores, related to the Electronic Funds Transfer Act
  • Represented automotive filter manufacturer in relation to price fixing antitrust claims

Representative Trade Secret/Restrictive Covenant Experience:

  • Conducted one-week permanent injunction hearing on behalf of an automotive manufacturer, resulting in permanent injunction preventing the sale and importation of several misappropriated products
  • Conducted two-week trial bench trial on behalf of automotive part manufacturer, resulting in an injunction as to use of formulas and designs
  • Conducted two-week jury trial on behalf of retailer related to formulations, resulting in a no-liability for client
  • Conducted two-week arbitration involving corporate raiding and trade secret allegations in consulting space, resulting in a finding of no liability for clients
  • Obtained permanent injunction against former employee and new company to prevent selling of misappropriated surgical products
  • Obtained permanent injunction against former employee and new employer, resulting in acquisition of assets of new employer to resolve dispute
  • Pursued and defended manufacturer of plant-based food products
  • Pursued and defended restrictive covenant cases on behalf of various medical device manufacturing companies
  • Pursued and defended restrictive covenant cases on behalf of various logistic companies

Jason 's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.26.25

Ninth Circuit Affirms that CIPA Only Applies to Third-Party Eavesdropping

Crowell attorneys have closely monitored developments related to the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). In particular, we have watched plaintiffs attempt to extend this wiretapping law to encompass website chatbot communications that are managed by third parties....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.26.25

Ninth Circuit Affirms that CIPA Only Applies to Third-Party Eavesdropping

Publication | 06.10.25

Appellate Guidance Needed On California Chatbot Litigation

Event | 04.29.25 - 04.30.25

ACI 9th Advanced Summit on Food Law Regulation, Compliance and Litigation

Speaking Engagement | 04.29.25

“Class-Action Litigation Trends in the Food Industry,” ACI 9th Advanced Summit on Food Law Regulation, Compliance and Litigation

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

Jason 's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.26.25

Ninth Circuit Affirms that CIPA Only Applies to Third-Party Eavesdropping

Crowell attorneys have closely monitored developments related to the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). In particular, we have watched plaintiffs attempt to extend this wiretapping law to encompass website chatbot communications that are managed by third parties....

View All Insights