Washington, D.C. intellectual property lawyer Matt Phillips talks about changing counsel to an appeal specialist on appeal. He admits with a smile that he would love for every client to change counsel on appeal—because he genuinely loves appellate work. Ever since his clerkship at the Federal Circuit, he has had a deep appreciation for the appellate process, particularly the intellectual rigor and precision it demands.

That said, he acknowledges that there are valid reasons for clients to seek new counsel on appeal beyond personal enthusiasm. A fresh perspective from an attorney who can assess the record objectively often proves invaluable. He enjoys stepping into that role—evaluating a case with new eyes and identifying the most strategic path forward.

He explains that an experienced appellate advocate brings a distinct set of skills compared to a trial litigator. Chief among these are the careful selection of issues, the ability to brief them persuasively, and the skill to present them effectively during oral argument. He emphasizes that briefing is especially critical, as it serves as the judges’ first and often most lasting impression of the case. Since appellate judges come to the briefs with no prior familiarity with the facts or record, the clarity and precision of that written presentation can be decisive.

At the same time, he concedes that switching counsel before an appeal is not without drawbacks. It can be less efficient and more costly to bring a new lawyer up to speed. However, he believes that in many instances, this investment pays dividends—particularly when the goal is to refine the message, sharpen the arguments, and give the case its strongest possible presentation on appeal.