Litigation

iStock_000007919993Small

We Play Chess…..Not Checkers.

Success in litigation doesn’t result from a single move, but from a series of carefully planned steps implemented perfectly.  Whether we are litigating in a courtroom, or strategically reviewing and implementing your intellectual property portfolio in coordination with market expansion, we are always thinking ten steps ahead. Having these sound intellectual property and legal strategies in place can help your company avoid disputes, but in today’s global marketplace conflicts can and do arise.

Because lawsuits are expensive and outcomes uncertain, TKLG strives to negotiate early resolution of matters before investing your company’s valuable time, energy and financial resources. When litigation is unavoidable, our aggressive litigators will zealously enforce and defend your valuable intellectual property rights.

We have a reputation for successfully litigating intellectual property rights and franchise disputes both in arbitration and before the various U.S. Federal District and California State courts. Our experience spans, among other matters, litigation of issues involving patent infringement, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, counterfeiting, false advertising, and rights of publicity issues.

Our professionals are also skilled in handling disputes before various administrative tribunals, such as opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and domain name disputes before the World Intellectual Property Organization and National Arbitration Forum. By defending and enforcing these valuable IP rights, TKLG enhances its clients’ businesses and maintains their competitive edges for the future.

Representative Cases

Structural Plastics v. Sam Pievac Company
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Pending
Description: Trademark infringement lawsuit involving dispute over the rights to SPC.

 

Nova-Ortho Medical v. Farinpour
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Pending
Description: Trademark infringement and cybersquatting case.

 

Peter O’Colmain v. Aussie Pet Mobile, Inc.
Practice Area: Franchising Dispute
Outcome: Jury award of $750,000 with almost one-half million in punitive damages.
Description: Brian Kinder served as lead trial counsel in a nearly month-long jury trial. Obtained unanimous jury verdict for fraud and violation of franchise investment laws against both the franchisor and the owner of the franchise personally.

 

Sound Waves v. Advanced Thermal Insulation
Practice Area: Trade Secrets
Outcome: Settled
Description: Clients were former employees of a company. When they left the company and started their own competing business, their former employer sued them for misappropriation of trade secret. Another lawyer was originally handling the case and TKLG was brought in several months into the lawsuit. The prior lawyer had not tendered the case to insurance for handling, so TKLG immediately did so and got coverage. After several months of litigation, the case settled with virtually nothing out of pocket for TKLG’s client. A huge win for the client.

 

Huff Flanders, Inc. v. Aussie Pet Mobile, Inc.
Practice Area: Franchising Dispute
Outcome: Obtained arbitration award valued at over $750k.
Description: Several months after negotiating nearly a million dollar settlement agreement on behalf of his client, Mr. Kinder filed a demand for arbitration when the other side breached the agreement and accused his client of unfair competition. As lead trial counsel in a three week arbitration with witnesses spanning several states, obtained award valued at over $750k.

 

EKPG v. LAT
Practice Area: Copyright Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to a confidential win-win settlement agreement.
Description: Defended copyright infringement case involving fabric design. Resolved the case via confidential settlement agreement. Opposing party was so impressed with the manner in which TKLG resolved the case, they later ended up retaining TKLG.  How many firms can claim to make both their client and the opposing party happy.

 

RRLH, Inc. v. Golden Rain Foundation, Inc.
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to confidential settlement agreement.
Description: Defense of trademark infringement claims concerning LEISURE WORLD trademark; prosecution of counterclaims. Settled pursuant to a confidential settlement agreement after substantial preparation and just a few days before trial scheduled to begin.

 

RM Equipment, Inc. v. AEX, LLC dba Airsoft Extreme
Practice Area: Patent Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to confidential settlement agreement.
Description: Defense of patent infringement claims concerning airsoft guns and accessories. Negotiated favorable settlement agreement on behalf of client.

 

Prolab Nutrition, Inc. v. NBTY, Inc. and Met-Rx Substrate Technology, Inc.
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to confidential settlement agreement.
Description: Prosecution of declaratory judgment action for non-infringement concerning MET-RX trademark; defense of counterclaims. Resolved via confidential settlement agreement.

 

Military Order of the Purple Heart v. Purple Heart Veterans Rehabilitation Services
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to confidential settlement agreement.
Description: Defended action for trademark infringement concerning PURPLE HEART trademark; prosecuted counterclaims for intentional interference with actual and prospective economic advantage.

 

Flip Skateboards, Inc. v. Absolute International PTY LTD
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to confidential agreement
Description: Trademark infringement lawsuit in Central District of California Federal Court.

 

Metasoft v. Global Operations and Development
Practice Area: Intellectual Property
Outcome: Settled Forcing Plaintiff to Pay All Costs and Attorney Fees
Description: Defended action by Canadian company against Orange County based non-profit corporation.

 

New Enchantment v. The Journey Spa & Wellness Center
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Settled pursuant to a confidential settlement agreement
Description: Trademark infringement lawsuit.

 

Venvest Ballard v. Clockwork Home Services
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Pending
Description: Federal declaratory judgment action for non-infringement of trademark, non-compete and unfair competition.

 

Clutch Masters v. eClutchMaster
Practice Area: Trademark Infringement
Outcome: Opposition granted, judgment for client, infringing application cancelled by Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Description: Opposition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board for a trademark application directed to a mark confusingly similar to my client’s trademark.