Attorney RecordBusiness Law · San Francisco County
Raymond A. Cardozo · Business Law 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.
Raymond A. Cardozo is on California’s State Bar roll, #173263, admitted in 1994; 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: Business Law. This profile lists one third-party recognition, in Chambers USA 2026, as published by Chambers and Partners. 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 business law 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 7 October 2026. Contact information on this page comes from the public record and is shown free, the registry never paywalls it.
1 finding about you awaits your confirmation. Claim your profile to review and add the ones that are yours →
The record
| State Bar number | #173263 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 1994 |
| Law school | Univ of California Berkeley |
| Firm | Reed Smith LLP |
| Location | San Francisco, San Francisco County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
Diamond members practicing Business Law 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trinh v. Homan | Counsel for the petitioner | 333 F. Supp. 3d 984 | U.S. District Court, Central District of California | 6 September 2018 |
| Bladeroom Grp. Ltd. v. Emerson Elec. Co. | Counsel for the defendant | 331 F. Supp. 3d 977 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 3 August 2018 |
| Curry v. Equilon Enters., LLC | Counsel for the respondent | 23 Cal. App. 5th 289 | California Court of Appeal | 26 April 2018 |
| Goncharov v. Uber Techs., Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 19 Cal. App. 5th 1157 | California Court of Appeal | 29 January 2018 |
| Khan v. Dunn-Edwards Corp. | Counsel for the respondent | 19 Cal. App. 5th 804 | California Court of Appeal | 4 January 2018 |
| People v. Conagra Grocery Prods. Co. | Counsel for the appellant | 17 Cal. App. 5th 51 | California Court of Appeal | 14 November 2017 |
| Vergara v. State | Counsel for the appellant | 209 Cal. Rptr. 3d 532 | California Supreme Court | 14 April 2016 |
| Vergara v. State of California | Counsel for the appellant | 246 Cal. App. 4th 619 | California Court of Appeal | 14 April 2016 |
| Thermolife International, LLC v. Gaspari Nutrition Incorporated | Counsel for the appellant | 648 F. App'x 609 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 April 2016 |
| Genesis Merchant Partners, LP v. Nery's USA, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 640 F. App'x 623 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 15 January 2016 |
| Scott v. C. R. Bard, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 231 Cal. App. 4th 763 | California Court of Appeal | 19 November 2014 |
| Ward v. Goossen | Counsel for the plaintiff | 71 F. Supp. 3d 1010 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 15 October 2014 |
| Morrical v. Rogers | Counsel for the respondent | 220 Cal. App. 4th 438 | California Court of Appeal | 10 October 2013 |
| Darru Hsu v. Ubs Financial Services, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 507 F. App'x 716 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 11 February 2013 |
| Cooper v. Federal Aviation Administration | Counsel for the appellant | 696 F.3d 1265 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 4 October 2012 |
| Perez v. Torres | Counsel for the respondent | 206 Cal. App. 4th 418 | California Court of Appeal | 24 May 2012 |
| Landeros v. Torres | Counsel for the respondent | 206 Cal. App. 4th 398 | California Court of Appeal | 24 May 2012 |
| Dacey v. Taraday | Counsel for the appellant | 196 Cal. App. 4th 962 | California Court of Appeal | 21 June 2011 |
| Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Mortgage Guaranty Insurance | Counsel for the respondent | 642 F.3d 849 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 15 June 2011 |
| Raymond Reudy v. Clearchannel Outdoor, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 430 F. App'x 568 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 28 April 2011 |
| Raymond Reudy v. Clearchannel Outdoor, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 428 F. App'x 774 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 25 April 2011 |
| Lawson v. Safeway Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 191 Cal. App. 4th 400 | California Court of Appeal | 30 December 2010 |
| McCaskey v. CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSN. | Counsel for the respondent | 189 Cal. App. 4th 947 | California Court of Appeal | 29 October 2010 |
| Cooper v. Federal Aviation Administration | Counsel for the appellant | 622 F.3d 1016 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 16 September 2010 |
| Bay Guardian Co. v. New Times Media LLC | Counsel for the appellant | 187 Cal. App. 4th 438 | California Court of Appeal | 11 August 2010 |
| United Investors Life Insurance v. Donna Grant | Counsel for the appellant | 387 F. App'x 683 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 July 2010 |
| San Francisco Unified School District Ex Rel. Contreras v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 182 Cal. App. 4th 438 | California Court of Appeal | 26 February 2010 |
| Cooper v. Federal Aviation Administration | Counsel for the appellant | 596 F.3d 538 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 22 February 2010 |
| Chacon v. Litke | Counsel for the respondent | 181 Cal. App. 4th 1234 | California Court of Appeal | 19 January 2010 |
| Standard Microsystems Corp. v. Winbond Electronics Corp. | Counsel for the appellant | 179 Cal. App. 4th 868 | California Court of Appeal | 24 November 2009 |
| Cell Therapeutics, Inc. v. Lash Group, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 586 F.3d 1204 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 18 November 2009 |
| Reudy v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 356 F. App'x 2 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 July 2009 |
| Reudy v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 356 F. App'x 2 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 July 2009 |
| Spanair S.A. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. | Counsel for the respondent | 172 Cal. App. 4th 348 | California Court of Appeal | 19 March 2009 |
| CarrAmerica Realty Corp. v. NVIDIA Corp. | Counsel for the respondent | 302 F. App'x 514 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 10 March 2009 |
| Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum L.P. | Counsel for the respondent | 45 Cal. 4th 634 | California Supreme Court | 29 January 2009 |
| Fitz-Gerald v. Skywest Airlines, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 155 Cal. App. 4th 411 | California Court of Appeal | 19 September 2007 |
| Rotolo v. San Jose Sports & Entertainment, LLC | Counsel for the appellant | 151 Cal. App. 4th 307 | California Court of Appeal | 24 May 2007 |
| State Ex Rel. Grayson v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co. | Counsel for the respondent | 142 Cal. App. 4th 741 | California Court of Appeal | 12 September 2006 |
| In Re Vaccine Cases | Counsel for the respondent | 134 Cal. App. 4th 438 | California Court of Appeal | 28 November 2005 |
| Farah Mudathir Farah Taha v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General | Counsel for the petitioner | 389 F.3d 800 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 November 2004 |
| Reina Izabel Garcia-Martinez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General | Counsel for the appellant | 371 F.3d 1066 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 June 2004 |
| Schifando v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 31 Cal. 4th 1074 | California Supreme Court | 23 December 2003 |
| Robert B. v. Susan B. | Counsel for the respondent | 109 Cal. App. 4th 1109 | California Court of Appeal | 13 June 2003 |
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 1, Litigation: Appellate (California). As published by Chambers and Partners; CAR does not rank attorneys. Firm at the time: Reed Smith LLP.
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 Reed Smith LLP.
A firm or employer website answers at reedsmith.com, the domain of the email address on the State Bar record.
The law school on the record is UC Berkeley School of Law.
Admitted to the California Bar in 1994 · 32 years on the roll.
Practice areas on the record: Business Law.
44 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 Raymond A. Cardozo’s license status, bar number #173263, 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
Business Law 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