AZA Law, formally Ahmad, Zavitsanos & Mensing, has operated as a Houston trial firm since 2001, built around a group of lawyers who try cases rather than settle them. Chambers USA ranked the firm for its 12th consecutive year in 2025, describing it as a home for “true courtroom lawyers” with a track record in complex commercial and intellectual property disputes. Name partner Todd Mensing of AZA holds board certification in Civil Trial Law, a credential awarded to an average of fewer than five Texas attorneys per year, and has tried more than sixty cases across energy, patent, contract, trade secret, and employment matters. Specific documented outcomes, drawn from court records and firm summaries, show how the practice actually divides.

AZA’s core categories, as described by Chambers and reflected in the firm’s own case archive, include commercial litigation, intellectual property, energy, trade secrets, non-competes, and corporate investigations. Best Lawyers recognized the firm as Tier 1 in Houston for commercial litigation, intellectual property, employment law for management, construction litigation, personal injury litigation for defendants, and appellate work in its most recent edition. For Todd Mensing and AZA, those categories don’t stay neatly separated; the trial record runs across all of them.

Energy Disputes and the Subsurface

Among AZA’s documented energy cases, the SilverBow Resources litigation produced one of the most scrutinized Texas oil-and-gas verdicts of recent years. SilverBow Resources Operating LLC and co-plaintiff El Dorado Gas & Oil, Inc. sued ETC Field Services, LLC, an affiliate of Energy Transfer, alleging that the defendant’s injection of natural gas processing byproducts trespassed on subsurface formations the plaintiffs had the right to occupy.

Todd Mensing at AZA served as one of the trial counsel for SilverBow, alongside firm partners Taylor Freeman, Jane Robinson, and Cameron Byrd. A McMullen County jury in the 343rd District Court returned a combined award of $41.8 million: $24.5 million to SilverBow and $17.3 million to El Dorado. Verdict Search and The National Law Journal placed the result on their national top-verdict lists for 2023.

Taking Patent Claims Through the Federal Circuit

Chambers ranked AZA’s intellectual property practice for the fifth consecutive year in 2025 and the firm’s commercial litigation category for the 12th. IAM Patent 1000, which tracks patent litigation specialists, has listed the firm and ranked Todd Mensing of AZA as a leading IP litigator. His patent and IP work spans infringement claims, trade secret disputes, and commercial technology cases, often for energy and industrial sector clients.

One of the firm’s most closely followed patent wins involved a challenge to Google over spreadsheet navigation patents. AZA represented Data Engine Technologies LLC, whose patents described “a highly intuitive, user-friendly interface with familiar notebook tabs for navigating the three-dimensional worksheet environment.” A Delaware district court had dismissed those claims as covering abstract ideas ineligible for patent protection. The Federal Circuit reversed that ruling in October 2018, reinstating three of the patents and holding that the claimed technology was sufficiently concrete to qualify.

That outcome illustrates how AZA approaches patent disputes: representing patent holders against major defendants and carrying claims through federal appellate proceedings when district courts rule against clients. For Todd Mensing and AZA, the patent docket fits within the same trial-oriented model as the commercial and energy work.

A Breach of Contract Case in Federal Court

Port of Houston Authority v. Louis Dreyfus Commodities shows how the firm’s commercial contract practice looks in federal court. AZA represented the Port of Houston Authority in a breach of contract suit against a grain elevator operator in Case No. 4:19-cv-00746, before U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes in the Southern District of Texas. Todd Mensing served as lead trial counsel for AZA throughout the proceeding.

The dispute turned on maintenance obligations under a long-term operating agreement with the grain elevator operator. After a jury trial, the Port of Houston received a $22.32 million verdict for breach of contract. Translating grain elevator maintenance standards and operator performance benchmarks into a damages framework the jury could quantify was a central challenge at trial.

Trade Secret Defense in the Energy Sector

Sentinel Integrity Solutions, Inc. v. Mistras Group, Inc. shows how Todd Mensing and AZA approach trade secret defense with a noncompete overlay. Sentinel, a competitor to Mistras in the industrial infrastructure inspection industry, sued Mistras and several of its employees for breach of non-competition agreements, theft of trade secrets, and tortious interference. Sentinel sought $9 million in damages.

AZA, with Mensing and John Zavitsanos as trial counsel, first defeated Sentinel’s efforts to obtain a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. When the case proceeded to a three-week jury trial, Sentinel received a no-liability finding on all claims and Mistras was awarded $750,000 in attorneys’ fees through trial, plus additional fees on appeal. The court issued a final judgment canceling Sentinel’s trademark and awarding Mistras its costs.

Sentinel also illustrates a pattern that appears across several AZA trade secret matters: clients accused of misappropriation who are competing lawfully. Noncompete enforcement combined with trade secret claims and trademark disputes is not unusual in the energy services sector, where personnel movement between competitors is common and former employers often reach for injunctive relief as a first response.

AZA’s employment docket extends beyond trade secret defense to affirmative executive claims. Mensing won a jury verdict for former executive Gaines Watkins against Input/Output Inc., a seismic data company, in an age discrimination suit. The energy industry context recurred: Watkins had worked in the seismic processing business, and the case turned on whether his departure was an unlawful termination rather than a legitimate reduction in force.

Across these practice areas, from energy and patents to contract disputes, trade secrets, and employment claims, the common thread is that Mensing and the firm have taken cases to verdict rather than settling before the jury could weigh in. Chambers’ description of the firm as home to “true courtroom lawyers” reflects a practice model that is trial-ready by design. Best Lawyers named AZA Tier 1 in Houston across six litigation categories in its most recent edition. What the case record shows, more than any ranking, is a firm that takes cases to the jury and wins a significant share of them.

Keep reading: John Zavitsanos Named One of Top Law Firm Managing Partners in the Nation