Client Collaborations
All Representative Cases
Represented large national manufacturer in pursuing false advertising claims against online competitor. Obtained summary judgment and a permanent injunction barring the false claims.
Represented local transportation company in defending against claims of trademark infringement, including obtaining insurance coverage for defense of claims.
Have represented numerous clients in Trademark Trial and Appeal Board opposition and cancellation proceedings.
Regularly counsel clients on how to best protect and preserve their brands.
Represent Indian manufacturer in defending against claims of trademark infringement and unfair competition. United States Supreme Court granted client’s petition for a writ of certiorari, vacated an adverse Ninth Circuit decision, and remanded to the Ninth Circuit.
Represent a client in the fishing industry in pursuing trade secret, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), and other claims against former employees.
Represent chemical process industry client in pursuing trade secret and related claims against a rival manufacturer.
Represented publicly traded French company in defending against patent and trade secret claims arising out of its development of novel ultrasound technology. Case settled on a confidential basis near the close of discovery.
Represented executive in a high-profile lawsuit brought by former employer, asserting claims that our client misappropriated trade secrets, violated fiduciary duties, and breached contractual obligations. The case included a six-day evidentiary hearing of the former employer's motion for terminating sanctions based on allegations that our client had knowingly destroyed relevant evidence. The court rejected the allegations, finding that our client was a credible witness who did not violate a duty to preserve evidence, did not act in bad faith, and did not engage in conduct that prejudiced the former employer. As trial approached, the court granted a number of summary judgment and evidentiary motions that significantly limited the scope and value of plaintiffs’ claims. On what would have been the first day of trial, the parties were able to reach an amicable resolution that terminated the case.