Attorney RecordLos Angeles County
Mark R. Yohalem · California Lawyer
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.
Mark R. Yohalem is on California’s State Bar roll, #243596, admitted in 2006; license status: active as of 22 July 2026. The address of record is in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County. This profile lists one third-party recognition, in Chambers USA 2026, as published by Chambers and Partners. 29 case appearances are listed on this profile. Registry record updated 7 October 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 legal 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 16 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 7 October 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 | #243596 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 2006 |
| Law school | Harvard Univ Law School |
| Firm | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati |
| Location | Los Angeles, Los Angeles County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena | Counsel for the respondent | 897 F.3d 1141 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 30 July 2018 |
| United States v. John Sears | Counsel for the plaintiff | 652 F. App'x 553 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 15 June 2016 |
| United States v. Douglas Decinces | Counsel for the appellant | 808 F.3d 785 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 22 December 2015 |
| United States v. Antuan Dunlap | Counsel for the appellant | 593 F. App'x 619 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 4 December 2014 |
| United States v. Apel | Counsel for the respondent | 767 F.3d 800 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 August 2014 |
| United States v. Apel | Counsel for the respondent | 763 F.3d 1088 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 August 2014 |
| United States v. Dennis Emmett | Counsel for the respondent | 749 F.3d 817 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 17 April 2014 |
| United States v. Alfred Villalobos | Counsel for the respondent | 567 F. App'x 541 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 11 April 2014 |
| United States v. Alfred Villalobos | Counsel for the respondent | 748 F.3d 953 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 11 April 2014 |
| United States v. Sergio Ramos-Atondo | Counsel for the respondent | 732 F.3d 1113 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 11 October 2013 |
| United States v. Rufino Valdes-Vega | Counsel for the respondent | 714 F.3d 1134 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 25 April 2013 |
| United States v. Juan Gonzalez | Counsel for the respondent | 502 F. App'x 665 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 December 2012 |
| United States v. Edward Solarzano, Jr. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 492 F. App'x 816 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 9 November 2012 |
| United States v. Stanley | Counsel for the respondent | 688 F.3d 1192 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 16 August 2012 |
| United States v. Kevin Stanley | Counsel for the respondent | 481 F. App'x 335 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 16 August 2012 |
| United States v. Apel | Counsel for the respondent | 676 F.3d 1202 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 25 April 2012 |
| United States v. Baraka Betts | Counsel for the respondent | 458 F. App'x 630 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 November 2011 |
| United States v. Tarakeswar Chaudhary | Counsel for the respondent | 451 F. App'x 713 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 October 2011 |
| United States v. Daniel Osazuwa, Jr. | Counsel for the respondent | 446 F. App'x 919 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 12 August 2011 |
| United States v. Martin Diamond | Counsel for the respondent | 463 F. App'x 608 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 20 June 2011 |
| United States v. Jerron Johns | Counsel for the respondent | 435 F. App'x 628 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 2 June 2011 |
| United States v. Parker | Counsel for the respondent | 651 F.3d 1180 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 24 May 2011 |
| United States v. Henderson | Counsel for the respondent | 649 F.3d 955 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 29 April 2011 |
| United States v. Fernando Gomez | Counsel for the respondent | 415 F. App'x 787 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 23 February 2011 |
| United States v. Lindsey | Counsel for the respondent | 634 F.3d 541 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 January 2011 |
| Binyam Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 614 F.3d 1070 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 September 2010 |
| Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 616 F.3d 904 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 22 July 2010 |
| Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. City of San Francisco | Counsel for the appellant | 345 F. App'x 276 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 9 September 2009 |
| Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. City of San Francisco | Counsel for the appellant | 345 F. App'x 276 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 9 September 2009 |
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.
Third-party recognitions
Third-party recognitions, as published by their issuers. CAR does not rank attorneys. How to read a Chambers recognition.
Chambers USA 2026, Band 2, Litigation: Appellate (California). As published by Chambers and Partners; CAR does not rank attorneys. Firm at the time: Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
Published source · Methodology
Published by Chambers and Partners and shown under licence. Not yet confirmed by the attorney. Last checked 3 October 2026.
Are you this attorney? Claim this record to confirm, correct or remove a recognition →
Issuers set their own criteria and may sell marketing products to the firms they recognize. A recognition is not a guarantee of any result. The California Attorney Registry is not affiliated with Chambers and Partners.
On the official record
The employer on the official record is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
The law school on the record is Harvard University Law School.
Admitted to the California Bar in 2006 · 20 years on the roll.
29 appearances as counsel in published opinions are on this record.
The address of record is in Los Angeles, in Los Angeles County, where matters are ordinarily heard at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, seated at Los Angeles.
Confirm Mark R. Yohalem’s license status, bar number #243596, 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
Los Angeles 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