Erin E. Meyer

We represented Sutter Health in defeating a qui tam action alleging violation of California's Insurance Frauds Prevention Act in a case related to charges for health care services. Following a seven-week bench trial, we obtained a complete victory. The judge ruled that there was no fraud, that Sutter charged for recovery room care that was “medically ordered, appropriate, and supervised,” and that Sutter’s charges were consistent with standard industry billing practices.

We represented secure networking company Fortinet, winning a complete defense verdict after a four-week jury trial in Santa Clara Superior Court where plaintiff Alorica sought compensatory damages of more than $200 million, plus additional enhancements for punitive damages. The jury found that Fortinet was not liable on Alorica’s claims of fraud and breach of warranty. KVP was retained a few months before the trial date, and in short order the defense team obtained several favorable pretrial rulings. Prior to the jury verdict, the KVP team also obtained directed verdicts on punitive damages and plaintiff’s largest claim for compensatory damages.

We defended Google in a nine-patent case involving audio signal processing software brought by Jawbone in the Western District of Texas. After obtaining a Markman order that disposed of four of the nine patents, we successfully appealed the denial of Google's transfer motion to the Northern District of California. Shortly after the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the case transferred in a published decision, a favorable settlement was reached.

We represented Coinbase against claims that it delayed the release of two new digital assets into customers’ digital wallets, alleging fraud and unfair competition. The judge granted our motion to compel arbitration without argument and dismissed the case. Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal. In a ruling that clarifies new U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the district court must stay a case after compelling arbitration, as opposed to dismissing the case and allowing for an appeal. The outcome marks a win for Coinbase in a significant consumer class action.

We defended Coinbase in a putative class action alleging insider trading and violations of the Commodities Exchange Act and Business & Professions Code Section 17200 in connection with the launch of a new digital currency, Bitcoin Cash. We filed a successful motion to dismiss all but one of the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court order denying a motion to compel arbitration of the sole remaining claim in the case and requiring the plaintiffs to individually arbitrate that claim. Following the Ninth Circuit reversal, the plaintiffs agreed to dismiss all their claims with prejudice.

On behalf of Instacart, we have successfully defended against numerous class and collective actions across the country alleging that that shoppers who use Instacart’s technology platform should be classified as employees rather than independent contractors. We have won a number of early dispositive motions in these cases, including motions to compel individual arbitration and to enforce class and collective action bars.

We defended the United States’ largest self-storage operator, Public Storage, in two class actions filed in California alleging violations of Business & Professions Code Section 17200 and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. We successfully defeated class certification in the Downey case in May 2018 (and handled the appeal in which that decision was affirmed) and won a complete defense verdict in the Perez case after trial—one of only a handful of class action trials recently conducted in California.

We defended the United States’ largest self-storage operator, Public Storage, from a consumer class action lawsuit. The plaintiff alleged our client deceived customers who bought tenant insurance policies. The plaintiff claimed Public Storage sold tenant insurance to him and other storage consumers without properly disclosing that the company retains a “substantial portion” of the premiums. The suit claimed that the insurance program offered by Public Storage was “a hidden profit center for itself that kicks back unconscionable profits at the expense of consumers.” The suit, filed in Miami federal court, sought restitution for all of the insurance premiums paid to Public Storage by its customers over the past four years. Within three months of being retained, and just seven months before trial, we prevailed on a Summary Judgment Motion which dismissed the class’ RICO claim. The matter settled favorably two days before trial.

In classic David vs. Goliath litigation, we defended the founders of a digital currency startup against allegations of intellectual property theft brought by a large, international company. The litigation spanned multiple jurisdictions and involved conflicts between U.S. and foreign law. After we won an early strategic motion bringing a full stop to the plaintiffs’ California litigation, and after we filed counterclaims on behalf of our clients against the original plaintiffs in a new action in Delaware Chancery Court, the multi-jurisdiction litigation reached a confidential settlement. The company our clients founded has now raised more than $40 million in venture capital funding.

Our client's former CEO threatened litigation over his termination and the conversion of his equity interests in the company. On behalf of the company, we sought declaratory relief in arbitration. The former CEO brought counterclaims seeking more than $100 million in damages. Following a three-week hearing, the arbitrator granted our client's request for declaratory relief and dismissed all counterclaims, finding for our client on every disputed legal and factual issue.

We defended SanDisk from numerous patent assertions by Round Rock, including a total of 15 patents asserted in two separate litigations in the District of Delaware, and 12 patents asserted in another case in the Northern District of California. We prevailed in all adjudicated phases of the Delaware and California actions before the parties reached a broad settlement. In the California action, we secured final judgment in favor of SanDisk after obtaining a summary-judgment victory based on patent exhaustion. In the first Delaware phase, which culminated with a jury trial on two asserted patents, we obtained a defense verdict invalidating most asserted claims of both patents, and finding no infringement as to the other claims. In the next Delaware phase, a second jury trial was vacated after we obtained summary judgment invalidating claims from a third patent asserted by Round Rock. The other patents in the Delaware actions remained pending adjudication when the parties settled.

We helped our client CedarCrestone, Inc. reach a successful settlement in this copyright infringement suit. Oracle had sued former business partner CedarCrestone Inc. in California federal court, accusing it of misappropriating Oracle's intellectual property during their partnership and then using its partner status to attract customers.