Micha is a versatile attorney who litigates employment, commercial, and trade secret disputes and counsels clients on matters in these areas. He handles cases and advises clients on non-compete agreements, protecting proprietary information, and wrongful termination, discrimination, and wage and hour claims, among other issues. Companies rely on his representation in court and before state and federal agencies, including the EEOC, DOJ, and similar California agencies. He also assists companies with workplace policies, investigations, and compliance — and he often performs management training for employers.
Mitch has extensive experience in employment law and in intellectual property litigation and complex commercial litigation. He has also served as a member of the firm's Policy Committee.
His work has focused on litigation in the areas of trade secrets, employee mobility, wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, contracts, defamation, wage and hour, complex commercial litigation and unfair competition. As part of his counseling practice, Mitch has performed management training for employers and rendered employment advice on employment-related issues, including those associated with hiring employees, terminating employees, workplace investigations, discrimination, protection of trade secrets, leaves of absence, reductions-in-force, and compliance with wage and hour laws, among others.
He has represented employers before numerous state and federal agencies including the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), the California Labor Commissioner, and the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Mitch is a frequent speaker on various employment-related topics and has appeared as a guest instructor for the San Diego State University Human Resources Certificate Program. He has also served as the author of News From National, the Labor and Employment Law quarterly newsletter for the NHRA.
Immediately prior to joining Mintz, Mitch was a partner in the San Diego office of a prominent national litigation firm. From 1982 to 1985, Mitch was a drill sergeant and combat conditioning and hand-to-hand combat instructor with the Israeli Defense Forces. Between 1989 and 1992, he was a police officer with the New York City Police Department. Mitch served as a patrol officer and in the NYPD’s “Pressure Point” narcotics task force.
The Daily Journal described him as one of the select few “California lawyers that companies turn to first.”
- University of Arizona (JD)
- Hunter College (BA)
- After taking the plaintiff’s deposition, Mitch settled for nuisance value a disability and race discrimination lawsuit brought by a plaintiff against an aircraft manufacturer.
- Conducted dozens of internal investigations regarding allegations of harassment, discrimination, and other workplace misconduct.
- For a large publically traded medical device company Mitch was able to get the plaintiff to agree to a walk-away settlement in a case where the plaintiff had filed a constructive termination, pregnancy discrimination, gender discrimination and harassment suit, claimed that the employer had intentionally caused her to have a miscarriage and had originally demanded over $1 million to settle the case.
- In a case against a major San Diego based defense contractor Mitch obtained summary adjudication of a former management-level employee’s claims for hostile work environment harassment, and constructive termination. As a result of the Court granting summary adjudication of the two most damaging claims made by the plaintiff, the remainder of the case was settled for a small fraction of the plaintiff’s settlement demand before the summary judgment hearing.
- In a trade secrets case, obtained a preliminary injunction that enjoined a group of former employees from calling on or selling to any of their former customers in Northern California for one year from the date of the employees’ resignations.
- In an arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, Mitch obtained summary judgment and dismissal of the entire action in a matter where the plaintiff, the former CEO and president of a publicly traded gaming company, was seeking over $10 million in damages for fraud, breach of the employment contract, and retaliation based on the termination of his employment contract worth over $1.5 million per year in total compensation.
- Obtained a favorable settlement of all claims — including fraud, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty — brought by a co-founder and former member providing services to the company who claimed, among other things, that he was removed “without cause” under the company’s Operating Agreement. The settlement followed the arbitrator’s granting, after a one-day hearing, the company and managers’ motion for evidentiary sanctions, issue, and monetary sanctions.
- Obtained a preliminary injunction in a trade secrets case that enjoined a group of former employees from calling on or selling to any of their former customers in Northern California for one year from the date of the employees’ resignations.
- Obtained an arbitration verdict in favor of a minority shareholder. After a two-week arbitration, the majority shareholder was ordered to buy out the minority shareholder for the maximum amount allowed by the shareholder agreement and to pay all of the minority shareholder’s attorney fees.
- Obtained judgment against former employee of a health care industry client for anonymous defamatory postings on a Yahoo® finance message board.
- Obtained summary judgment in a premises liability and negligence action where a semi-pro hockey player had filed suit against the rink and league organizer for injuries sustained during a hockey game.
- Obtained summary judgment in an employment action brought by a former high-level group director for a company who was seeking over $3 million in damages and had alleged breach of contract, wrongful termination, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation.
- Obtained verdict in favor of an insured/employer in an arbitration seeking recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the employer in defending complaint brought by the employer’s former president. The insurer refused to fully indemnify the employer for its attorneys’ fees and asserted it was entitled to offset for amount recovered by the employer on its cross-complaint in the underlying action. The arbitrator found in favor of the employer and ordered the insurer to reimburse the employer for 100% of its attorneys’ fees and costs.
- Obtained verdict in favor of the employer on a motion for summary adjudication filed by a former executive who was seeking an order that the executive’s non-compete agreement with the employer was void as a matter of law.
- Obtained verdicts in favor of a large wireless retailer in a series of wage and hour hearings brought before the California Department of Labor by former employees who alleged that the company improperly adjusted or reduced their previously earned commissions and bonuses.
- Representation of a cigar manufacturer and national wholesaler in a series of investigations by the Department of Justice regarding discriminatory hiring practices based on national origin, which led to a no cause finding by the DOJ.
- Representation of a large national retail chain in a series of investigations by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission into allegations of discriminatory hiring practices.
- Representation of a large wireless retailer accused of age and disability discrimination in an investigation by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which led to a no-cause finding by the DFEH.
- Represented a company that develops irrigation system controllers and its employee in non-compete actions in California and Pennsylvania filed by a competitor. After a two-day mini-trial on the jurisdictional and temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction motions, which included opening and closing arguments and the examination of witnesses, the Court granted our client's motion to dismiss finding it lacked jurisdiction over our client and denied the competitor's motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. These victories lead the parties to, in effect, a walk-away settlement and the dismissal of the respective California and Pennsylvania actions.
- Represented a dental laboratory network in a wage and hour class action filed on behalf of its former and current lab technicians. In the action, the class representative alleged that our client failed to pay overtime or keep proper payroll records. Mitch successfully negotiated a settlement agreement that resulted in a prompt dismissal of all claims, so that our client’s out-of-pocket payment was minimal.
- Successful resolved a preliminary injunction application between medical device manufacturer/distributors after ten days of expedited discovery in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Issues in case included scope of competition and non-compete clauses, breach of fiduciary duty, misappropriation of trade secrets, and civil conspiracy.
- Successfully settled two suits on favorable terms to a defense contractor: one was brought by a former employee alleging that the company had discriminated against him based on his age and medical status, while the other was brought by an employee alleging harassment, discrimination, and constructive termination. After taking the plaintiff’s deposition, Mitch settled for nuisance value a disability and race discrimination lawsuit brought by a plaintiff against an aircraft manufacturer.
- Obtained partial summary judgement from Delaware Chancery Court in favor of a medical device company and its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer in action brought on by a direct competitor of all claims based on the allegation that the executive breached non-competition and employee non-solicitation provisions in his previous employment agreement.
Recognition & Awards
- Benchmark Litigation: Labor & Employment Star (2022)
- Police Commissioner’s Award, New York City Police Department
- Daily Journal: Top Labor and Employment Lawyers in California (2020)
- National Law Journal: Employment Law Trailblazers (2020)
- San Diego Super Lawyers: Intellectual Property Litigation List (2019 – 2021)
- Southern California Super Lawyers: Intellectual Property Litigation List (2007 – 2009, 2011 – 2017)
- Best Lawyers in America: Employment Law - Management (2017 – 2022)
- Super Lawyers Corporate Counsel Edition: Top Attorneys in California for Corporate IP Litigation List
- Daily Journal: Top 60 Labor and Employment Lawyers in California (2010)
- Past vice president, Professional Issues for the San Diego Chapter of the National Human Resources Association (NHRA)
- Member, San Diego County Bar Association
- Member, American Bar Association
- Chairperson, Stand With Us Academic Affairs Committee
News & Press
February 22, 2022 | Article
December 14, 2021 | Blog | By Nicole Rivers, Micha Mitch Danzig, Jennifer Rubin
March 12, 2021 | Webinar | By Michael Arnold, David Barmak, Micha Mitch Danzig, Geri Haight, Andrew Matzkin, David Lagasse, O'Kelly E. McWilliams, III, Jennifer Rubin, Tyrone Thomas, Alexander Hecht, Danielle Bereznay, Delaney Busch, Corbin Carter, Emma Follansbee, Natalie C. Groot, Paul Huston, Brie Kluytenaar, Brendan Lowd, Nicole Rivers, Richard Block
May 8, 2020 | Blog | By Micha Mitch Danzig, Nicole Rivers
California Labor Code § 2802 (“Section 2802”) requires employers to reimburse California employees for “all necessary business expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties.” Its purpose is to prevent employers from passing their operating expenses to their employees. However, Section 2802 only requires reimbursement for “necessary” and “reasonable” costs incurred by the employee as a condition of continued employment. Previously, many employers allowed remote working as a convenience for their employees. Because working remotely was not required, many employers could decline “work from home” reimbursements because the employee’s expenses were voluntary (i.e. the employee chose to work remotely). However, COVID-19 and the resulting shelter-in-place orders have redefined the working landscape, requiring many employees to work remotely to keep businesses afloat.