Profile
Peter A. Arhangelsky provides a broad range of businesses with guidance through regulatory and litigation issues at virtually every stage. Many of his clients are FDA-regulated entities. He focuses his practice on food and drug law, false advertising, health law, contract and licensing, civil litigation, appellate advocacy, and constitutional law. His experience extends to commercial and business litigation, including litigation of unfair competition issues especially related to food and dietary supplement advertising. He manages complex civil cases and appeals within administrative agencies and federal courts, dealing with constitutional and administrative issues before agencies including the FDA, FTC, CMS, HHS, IRS, and DOJ.
In his regulatory practice, Peter advises clients on compliance with laws and regulations involving dietary supplements, foods, OTC drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, and other product categories regulated by Federal and State agencies. From inception to global marketing, Peter has experience and skill guiding clients through the intricate laws and regulations governing such heavily regulated businesses. He has robust experience in areas like labeling and advertising reviews, product strategy, cGMP and FSVP compliance, import detentions, FDA inspections and enforcement, premarket submissions, and regulatory affairs consultations. He has written articles on medical device regulation and been cited in legal publications on FDA law, advertising law, administrative law, and constitutional issues.
As an experienced litigator, Peter represents clients in intricate cases involving regulated products, corporate disputes, Lanham Act claims, state and federal business torts, constitutional law, unfair competition, and advertising. His experience includes substantial work in California dealing with consumer product lawsuits, Unfair Competition claims, and similar torts advanced against regulated entities. Peter managed numerous legal threats against businesses selling or distributing product into California. He represents direct sales and network marketing companies in regulatory concerns, commercial litigation, and distributor disputes. He has experience with intellectual property disputes commonly affecting businesses, including litigation over trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. He serves as a litigation consultant in complex matters involving the jurisdiction of the federal agencies.
Peter has wide-ranging experience in advertising law, particularly issues overlapping First Amendment concerns and the commercial speech doctrine. He has been the lead counsel in complex advertising lawsuits involving private businesses, the FTC, and individual plaintiffs. Peter is one of few attorneys to have achieved a successful trial outcome in defense of FTC false advertising claims under 16 CFR Part 3. He has managed claims under the California False Advertising Law (FAL), the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), and the Lanham Act. He has also represented parties in civil litigation under the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO Act), which relates to white collar activity. He has deep experience managing complex e-discovery and privilege issues.
Capabilities
Experience
- Alliance for Natural Health U.S. v. Sebelius, 786 F.Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2011). Represented ANH-USA in litigation where the court held that FDA’s censorship of qualified health claims for dietary supplements containing vitamins E and C violated the First Amendment.°
- Alliance for Natural Health U.S. v. Sebelius, 714 F.Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2010). Represented ANH-USA in litigation where the court held that FDA’s censorship of qualified health claims in dietary supplements containing selenium violated the First Amendment.°
- In re Novelty Distributors, DEA Docket No. 08-33 (May 21, 2008). Represented Novelty Distributors in a DEA trial involving the alleged diversion of Scheduled Listed Chemicals (SLCs).°
- Albion Intern., Inc. v. American Intern. Chemical, Inc., No. 2:07-cv-0994, 2012 WL 3776866 (D.Utah 2012). Obtained dismissal for defendant AMC in a competitor Lanham Act proceeding on grounds that plaintiff’s Lanham Act claim was barred by the doctrine of laches.°
- In re ECM BioFilms, Inc. d/b/a Enviroplastics International, FTC Dkt. 9358 (2013-2017). Represented ECM Biofilms in a full FTC adjudication under 16 CFR Part 3 and prevailed before the ALJ in defense of FTC’s challenge to ECM’s advertising of biodegradable plastics additives.°
- Nilon v. Natural-Immunogenics Corp., No. 3:12-cv-00930-LAB(BGS) (S.D. Cal. 2012-2015). Represented Natural-Immunogenics in successful defense of California UCL and CLRA lawsuit challenging dietary supplement advertising.°
- Federal Trade Commission v. Lunada Biomedical, Inc., et al., No. CV-15-3380-MWF(PLA) (C.D. Cal. 2015). Represented Lunada in federal FTC proceeding challenging advertising related to dietary supplement.°
- Larson et al. v. HGGC LLC et. al., No. 2:18-cv-03695 (C.D. Cal. 2018); Wallach et al. v. Johnson et al., No. 2:19-cv-04564 (D.Ariz. 2019). Provided representation in federal litigation seeking damages for defamation torts.°
- Natural-Immunogenics Corp. v. Newport Trial Group, No. 15-cv-02034-JVS, 2108 WL 6168035 (C.D. Cal.). Represented Natural-Immunogenics against a California-based consumer law firm in a civil RICO action where the district court held that defendants committed routine fraud on the courts through sham UCL and CLRA litigation.°
- Natural-Immunogenics Corp. v. Ferrell, et al., 766 Fed.Appx. 435 (9th Cir. 2019). Represented Natural-Immunogenics in successful appeal holding that defendant law firm was not entitled to an ex parte hearing before court compelled emails under the crime-fraud exception.°
- United States v. Global Vitality, Inc., No. 2:22-cv-01744 (D. Ariz.) Represented Global Vitality in an FDA enforcement action seeking a statutory injunction under the FDCA for alleged violations of cGMP standards in 21 CFR Part 111.°
- Telebrands Corp. Luminas International LLC, No. 3:22-cv-00891, 2023 WL 6370902 (S.D. Cal.) Represented Luminas in litigation involving California UCL claims and obtained dismissal on grounds that plaintiff’s lawsuit was preempted under the FDCA.°
- AJF Inspections Inc. v. IOC Franchising LLC, No. 22-cv-01922 (D. Ariz. 2023) Obtained a successful result in litigation for plaintiff AJF in a Federal Lanham Act case filed against a competitor.°
°The above representations were handled by Mr. Arhangelsky prior to his joining Greenberg Traurig, LLP.
- Rule 303 Criminal Defense, Suffolk University’s Public Defenders, 2006-2007
- Intern, Mass. Rule 303, Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office, 2006
Recognition & Leadership
- Listed, Super Lawyers magazine, Southwest Super Lawyers, “Rising Stars,” 2017-2018, 2020-2021
- Member, Arizona Bar Association, 2007-Present
- Member, California Bar Association, 2013-Present
- Member, American Bar Association, 2007-Present
Credentials
-
J.D., cum laude, Suffolk University Law School
- Note Editor, Suffolk University Law Review
- B.A., University of Delaware
- Arizona
- California
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California