- Super Lawyers®
October 1, 2021 | Super Lawyers®
Protecting valuable intangibles.
Antitrust litigation, business disparagement claims, patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets - intellectual property infringement and unfair business practice disputes are often high profile lawsuits that capture the attention of the media and can cost millions of dollars to litigate and resolve.
Given the sums at issue, it is little wonder that policyholders look to their insurance policies to fund litigation costs and resolution of those disputes. But intellectual property infringement and unfair business practice disputes may not fall within the intended scope of a general liability policy’s coverage and may be a risk for which a different specialty product has been developed. Policy provisions may limit or preclude coverage for these exposures.
Intellectual property infringement and unfair business practice disputes present novel insurance coverage issues that can be misunderstood or overlooked by those less familiar with these claims. In contrast, our attorneys are familiar with these complex coverage issues and have been litigating these issues across the country for over a decade. Recognized as leaders in this area, our attorneys help clients assess their coverage obligations and formulate cost-effective plans for investigating, handling and resolving intellectual property infringement claims.
TEAM
EXPERIENCE
- Preserved dismissal of coverage action on grounds that underlying allegations did not involve "advertising injury."
- Prevailed on summary judgment and obtained affirmance by the California Court of Appeal in a published decision upholding the application of an intellectual property exclusion to preclude coverage for right-to-publicity claims.
- Maintained ruling that insurer had no duty to defend patent litigation where alleged injury did not arise solely out of advertising, as required by insurer's policy, and suit was otherwise excluded from coverage.
- Obtained summary judgment in federal court on the grounds that insurer did not owe duty to defend claims concerning false and misleading statements in advertising regarding the quality and benefits of the insured's products, and infringement of registered trademarks.
- Litigated and favorably resolved dispute in Oregon involving allegations that the insured infringed the claimant's trademark.
- Evaluated and litigated coverage for insured video-game distributor's alleged infringement of plaintiff developer's intellectual property rights under Nevada law, including whether breach of contract exclusion applied to infringement of trade dress and copyrights that the claimant licensed to insured.
- Secured summary judgment finding no "advertising injury" coverage for patent infringement claim.
- Intervened in underlying North Carolina lawsuit to seek allocation of intellectual property damages between potentially-covered and non-covered where insured allegedly infringed upon the claimant's medical product-related trade dress, trademarks, and patents.
- Obtained affirmance of judgment granted for insurer in declaratory judgment action involving Florida law concerning whether allegations of price-fixing in an antitrust suit implicate the "advertising injury" offense requiring use of another's "advertising idea."
- Litigated whether, under Florida law, claims arising out of theft of laptops containing confidential health information implicated "personal and advertising injury" coverage for underlying settlement, arising out of the offense of oral or written publication of material violating a person's right to privacy, or "property damage" coverage due to loss of use of tangible property.
- Obtained summary judgment for insurer on basis that CGL policies provided no coverage for series of class-action antitrust and price-fixing lawsuits against insured, persuading court to reject argument that lawsuits involved "personal injury and advertising injury."
- In a case of first impression, affirmed summary judgment for insurer that prior publication exclusion barred coverage for trademark infringement suit because insured first used infringing portion of subject trademarks prior to policy inception.
- Obtained dismissal of coverage action, in which insured sought defense and indemnity for its settlement, on grounds that there was no duty to defend the underlying contractual dispute, which insured tried to characterize as copyright-infringement suit.
- Provided coverage advice regarding African physician's claim for copyright infringement for a literary work, pending in the Federal High Court of Nigeria in the Sokoto Judicial Division, Holden at Sokota, under the multimedia liability portion of client's cyber policy, and determined, through investigation, that coverage was unavailable.
- Litigated application of intellectual property exclusion to trademark infringement case in dispute over duty to defend and indemnify.
- Obtained judgment in favor of insurer in declaratory judgment action concerning Illinois law as to the scope of advertising injury coverage in the context of underlying patent infringement claims.
- Litigated determination of whether insured's settlement of copyright infringement dispute properly exhausted primary coverage layer, triggering umbrella carrier's indemnity obligations, including issues of proration and horizontal exhaustion.
- Obtained judgment in favor of insurer in declaratory judgment action under Massachusetts law involving issue of first impression as to whether antitrust claims that discussed disparagement by insured could trigger personal injury coverage, such that a defense obligation is owed even if the alleged disparagement was not directed at the underlying claimant.
- Secured summary judgment finding no advertising injury coverage for a patent infringement claim involving an automated telephone system used to sell insured's products.
NEWS
August 12, 2021
- Super Lawyers®
January 29, 2021 | Super Lawyers®
January 7, 2021
December 9, 2020