For more than a decade, we have represented the San Diego County Water Authority in litigation against the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the regional water wholesaler for most of Southern California. We have led them through three separate trials, and represented them in three separate appeals, resulting in more than $100 million in recovered damages, interest and attorneys’ fees, plus legal victories that have provided more than $1 billion in long-term benefit to the Water Authority.

We represented Instacart in a copyright lawsuit against Cornershop, a grocery-delivery company Uber purchased for $500 million. Cornershop launched its U.S. operations in Texas and Florida to compete with Instacart, using Instacart’s copyrighted images, which Cornershop scraped from Instacart’s website. After Instacart filed a complaint alleging claims under the Copyright Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, The Texas Harmful Access to Computers Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Cornershop stipulated to a comprehensive permanent injunction under which the company agreed not to scrape, display, publish, reproduce, or distribute any copies or derivatives of any of Instacart’s copyrighted images.

We represented Moonton, a Chinese video game developer, in a lawsuit filed by Riot Games asserting claims of copyright and trademark infringement relating to Riot's mobile game League of Legends: Wild Rift. We filed a motion to dismiss based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens, arguing that Riot should be required to pursue its claims in China because its lawsuit was intertwined with and inconsistent with a pending Chinese lawsuit filed by Riot's parent company, Tencent. The court granted the motion and dismissed the lawsuit.

Following multi-stage arbitration proceedings between our client, one of the world’s largest technology companies, and a company that had licensed certain technology to it through a complex licensing agreement, we recovered more than $50 million in cash and saved more than $200 million for our client in ongoing royalties. Our complete victory on all disputed contractual issues and interpretations following a multi-day arbitration hearing was central to the result.

We defended LinkedIn against a putative class action asserting novel claims under the Video Privacy Protection Act. The plaintiffs alleged that, by using third-party advertising and analytics technologies from Meta and Adobe, LinkedIn engaged in the unlawful sharing of personal information belonging to its LinkedIn premium subscribers who watched online training courses on its LinkedIn Learning platform without their knowledge or permission. After our motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their complaint.

We are representing the United Auburn Indian Community in a lawsuit contesting the Department of the Interior’s approval of the Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians’ application for a 615,000-square-foot headquarters and casino project in Vallejo, California. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, claims that the approval process for the project poses a threat to tribal sovereignty and violates federal laws. Less than a week after the suit was filed, the DOI temporarily rescinded the project’s gaming eligibility determination pending additional review.

We partnered with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights in this class action and secured a preliminary injunction barring Bad Boys Bail Bonds from collecting on more than $30 million of debt from unsuspecting bail bond co-signers. The case was the first of its kind to challenge a bail bond company for violating consumer protection laws. The California Court of Appeal upheld the injunction and the California Supreme Court declined review.