Attorney RecordLitigation · San Francisco County
Cedric C Chao · Litigation Attorney
Can’t reach them, or not sure who to call? Submit your case for review · attorneys who practice in your area read it and may send you terms. Free; your details stay masked until you choose.
Cedric C Chao is on California’s State Bar roll, #76045, admitted in 1977; license status: active as of 22 July 2026. The address of record is in San Francisco, San Francisco County. Practice areas listed in the registry: Litigation and Mediation and Arbitration. 24 case appearances are listed on this profile. Registry record updated 11 September 2026; license information comes from the State Bar.
This profile has not yet been claimed. Verify current license status at the State Bar before retaining counsel; the choice is always yours.
Have a litigation matter? Submit your case for review.
Open a free case file, choose how attorneys may contact you, and review any terms they send. You decide whom to contact and whether to proceed.
In the last 30 days attorneys have read 11 filed matters on the registry.
Submit your case for reviewLegal information, not legal advice
Registry verification
Verified against official State Bar of California records · record last updated 11 September 2026. Contact information on this page comes from the public record and is shown free, the registry never paywalls it.
10+ published court opinions may name you. Claim your profile to review and add the ones that are yours →
The record
| State Bar number | #76045 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 1977 |
| Law school | Harvard Univ Law School |
| Firm | Chao ADR, PC |
| Location | San Francisco, San Francisco County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
Diamond members practicing Litigation in San Francisco County
Practice areas
Practice areas are self-reported to the State Bar or added by the attorney; listing one is not a State Bar certification.
Understand your options
Free California worksheets to organize the facts before speaking with an attorney.
Verified profiles & presence
Professional identity links come from public sources or this attorney. Review-site ratings belong to their named source and may cover a firm or office. CAR does not combine them into an attorney rating.
Cases of record
From published opinions naming this attorney as counsel. The attorney has not yet confirmed these records.
| Case | Appeared for | Citation | Court | Decided |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| City of Oakland v. Loretta E. Lynch | Counsel for the appellant | 798 F.3d 1159 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 20 August 2015 |
| City of Oakland v. Holder | Counsel for the plaintiff | 961 F. Supp. 2d 1005 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 3 July 2013 |
| City of Oakland v. Holder | Counsel for the plaintiff | 901 F. Supp. 2d 1188 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 14 February 2013 |
| United States v. Real Property & Improvements Located at 1840 Embarcadero | Counsel for the plaintiff | 932 F. Supp. 2d 1064 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 7 January 2013 |
| Anonymous Online Speakers v. United States District Court | Counsel for the petitioner | 661 F.3d 1168 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 7 January 2011 |
| Anonymous Online Speakers v. United States District Court | Counsel for the petitioner | 611 F.3d 653 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 12 July 2010 |
| Pokorny v. Quixtar, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 601 F.3d 987 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 20 April 2010 |
| Nitgen Co. v. Secugen Corp. | Counsel for the respondent | 111 F. App'x 512 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 21 October 2004 |
| Garamendi v. SDI Vendome S.A. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 276 F. Supp. 2d 1030 | U.S. District Court, Central District of California | 4 August 2003 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the plaintiff | 963 F. Supp. 874 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 1 May 1997 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the plaintiff | 930 F. Supp. 1377 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 17 June 1996 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the respondent | 81 F.3d 808 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 12 April 1996 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the respondent | 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2570 | California Supreme Court | 12 April 1996 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the plaintiff | 837 F. Supp. 1506 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 6 October 1993 |
| Wang Zong Xiao v. Reno | Counsel for the plaintiff | 837 F. Supp. 1500 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 2 March 1993 |
| Xiao v. Barr | Counsel for the respondent | 979 F.2d 151 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 30 October 1992 |
| Storek & Storek, Inc. v. Port of Oakland | Counsel for the appellant | 869 F.2d 1322 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 13 March 1989 |
| Oen Yin-Choy v. Glen S. Robinson, U.S. Marshal for the Northern District of California | Counsel for the appellant | 858 F.2d 1400 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 October 1988 |
| San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee v. March Fong Eu | Counsel for the respondent | 792 F.2d 802 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 18 June 1986 |
| John Riley Henrique v. United States Marshal and United States Parole Commission, Respondents | Counsel for the respondent | 653 F.2d 1317 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 18 November 1981 |
| United States v. Robert W. Benedict | Counsel for the respondent | 647 F.2d 928 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 June 1981 |
| United States v. Kenneth Lee Hozian | Counsel for the respondent | 622 F.2d 439 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 30 June 1980 |
| Richard E. Brown v. United States | Counsel for the respondent | 623 F.2d 54 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 21 May 1980 |
| Henrique v. United States Marshal | Counsel for the respondent | 476 F. Supp. 618 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 26 June 1979 |
Appearances in published opinions, drawn from public court records. Cases of record are matters of public record and are not a representation of results; past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Legal information, not legal advice.
Each case name opens the published opinion it comes from. Is a case not this attorney’s? The attorney can claim this profile and mark it as not theirs, which removes it from this page; anyone can report an error through Help & Support.
On the official record
The employer on the official record is Chao ADR, PC.
A firm or employer website answers at chao-adr.com, the domain of the email address on the State Bar record.
The law school on the record is Harvard University Law School.
Admitted to the California Bar in 1977 · 49 years on the roll.
Practice areas on the record: Litigation and Mediation and Arbitration.
24 appearances as counsel in published opinions are on this record.
The address of record is in San Francisco, in San Francisco County, where matters are ordinarily heard at the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, seated at San Francisco.
Confirm Cedric C Chao’s license status, bar number #76045, and official disciplinary or administrative history directly with the State Bar of California at apps.calbar.ca.gov before retaining counsel. This profile does not reproduce the complete official history; missing information does not mean no discipline. This page indexes public-record data and identifies verified claims; it does not rate attorney quality or predict results.
Legal information, not legal advice.
On the record nearby
Litigation in San Francisco County: next on the roll
San Francisco County: next on the roll
Listed alphabetically by last name, continuing from this record. Not a recommendation.
For Attorneys
Your profile is already on the roll. Make it yours.
Every California attorney is indexed here from the official State Bar roll, including you. Verify your identity in minutes, present your practice the way you want clients to see it, and unlock the Referral Exchange · send and receive matters with verified attorneys, fees divided 100% between counsel under CRPC 1.5.1.
Claim My ProfileFree to claim · referrals free at every level · identity verified against the State Bar record
Read the record. Then decide.
Describe your matter once, review the verified records, and place the call; the choice is always yours.
Find Your Counsel279,000+ attorney records · 58 counties · Official State Bar records