Experience

Visa International Service Association v. BankIslami Pakistan Ltd.

Represented Visa in a breach of contract and breach of implied good faith and fair dealing action brought in the Northern District of California.

Mercari U.S. Inc.

Represented Mercari in response to subpoenas issued by Meta and the Federal Trade Commission in the FTC v. Meta antitrust action.

Trial Victory for Smart Meter Technology Company

Defended a smart meter technology company in a federal bankruptcy court bench trial against billion-dollar damage claims asserted by a technology licensor. Following the two-week trial, the court found for our client on all counts, not only rejecting the licensor’s damage claims but fully vindicating our client's rights under the license agreement.

Unfair Competition Law Litigation

Elizabeth Dorsi Headshot at Farella Braun + Martel

Successfully represented a developer in an Unfair Competition Law action brought by a District Attorney’s office alleging numerous “malicious” unlawful acts and omissions arising from a large pre-historic Native American cemetery that was discovered and damaged during construction of a residential development project. After a 4+ week bench trial, the court found no unlawful acts and awarded a complete defense victory.

TCPA Class Action

Represent Tilt Holdings and cannabis technology company Baker Technologies in defending a proposed Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action.

Historic $575 Million Settlement With Sutter Health in Antitrust Class Action

Represented UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust (UEBT) and a certified class of direct purchasers of hospital services in seeking preliminary approval of a historic settlement reached on the eve of trial in the landmark antitrust class action against Sutter Health, the largest hospital system in Northern California. Sutter has agreed to pay $575,000,000 in monetary relief and to comply with comprehensive injunctive relief, including an independent monitor who will police Sutter’s compliance with the proposed final judgment over a 10-year period.

Confidential AAA Arbitration

After a three-week arbitration hearing, our trial team won a $4 million-plus arbitration award on behalf of a small technology startup against a multinational corporation for breach of a nanotechnology development agreement.

Confidential International Arbitration

We defeated plaintiffs’ main claims in a multi-million dollar international arbitration under UNCITRAL rules relating to deep-sea diving pipeline work in an offshore oil field off the coast of Angola. 

Atmel Corporation v. Ericsson

We represented Atmel, a leading semiconductor manufacturer, in a multi-week arbitration through which we obtained an award of over $43 million arising from Ericsson's misappropriation of Atmel's patented AVR microcontroller technology and Ericsson's multiple breaches of the parties' license agreement.  The International Centre for Dispute Resolution, International Arbitration Tribunal also awarded Atmel a permanent injunction prohibiting Ericsson from continued misappropriation of Atmel's proprietary technology.

hiQ Labs Inc. v. LinkedIn Corp.

Represented startup hiQ Labs Inc. in a precedent-setting litigation for data analytics, mining, and aggregator companies and their right to access publicly available data under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), and a California state law on unauthorized computer access. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed hiQ’s preliminary injunction against LinkedIn.

Roz v. Nestle Waters North America, Inc.

In addition to retail sales of bottled water, Nestle Waters, dba Arrowhead, also makes recurring monthly deliveries to home and office customers (i.e., water coolers). Plaintiffs brought a class action under a new California statutory scheme that regulates “automatic renewal contracts” – i.e., contracts where a credit card is charged on a repeated basis for continued deliveries of goods or services. Precedent in this area was limited because the statute is relatively new. In September 2017, the court denied class certification; plaintiff sought to try the case in order to preserve the right to appeal, and the case was set for trial in December 2017. After a pretrial ruling interpreted the statute to reject most of plaintiffs’ claims, the plaintiff agreed to dismiss with prejudice for a waiver of costs. 

Sunwest Construction v. Asera Group

Represented Philippine company in a breach of contract action against a supplier of windmills and solar panels. Obtained a stipulated judgment against defendants for the full amount sought, plus fees and costs.

Area 51 Productions v. City of Alameda

On appeal, we won a dismissal on anti-SLAPP grounds of an event promotions company’s business tort claims against a local city and its officials, with an award of attorney’s fees.  Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the rest of the suit.  Area 51 Productions, Inc. v. City of Alameda, 20 Cal. App. 5th 581 (2018). 

Auberge Resorts

We represented Auberge Resorts in connection with preparation and negotiation of management agreements, technical assistance agreements, and club management agreements for management of the two newest Auberge resorts: the Calistoga Ranch, an upscale resort and fractional ownership project in the heart of the Napa Valley, whose primary owner is Olympus Real Estate Partners; and the Inn at Palmetto Bluff, a luxury resort and spa with an associated Jack Nicklaus golf course, located in the South Carolina low country and owned by Crescent Resources, the development arm of Duke Energy.  We also negotiated Auberge’s participation in the ownership entity for Calistoga Ranch.

Claydon v. Nestle Waters North America

We successfully defended Nestle Waters in an alleged nationwide consumer class action filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming that Nestle Waters intentionally delivered unordered products to residential and commercial customers. After four years of litigation, we obtained summary judgment against plaintiff’s nationwide class breach of contract theory, and then defeated class certification on the remaining false advertising, Business & Professions Code section 17200 unfair competition, and fraud claims.

Haggarty v. Stryker Orthopaedics

We represented Stryker in a class action alleging unlawful kickbacks to physicians in order to encourage them to select Stryker medical devices. We substituted in as co-counsel after the matter had been litigated for two years and a motion to dismiss had been denied, and within six months convinced plaintiff to dismiss the case with prejudice in exchange for a waiver of costs.

California Supreme Court Amicus Brief Opposing Proposition 8

Farella filed an amicus brief on behalf of a coalition of advocacy groups opposing Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that bans same-sex marriage. Farella's amicus brief focuses on the negative and stigmatic impact the measure has on the current and future children of same-sex parents. The groups represented by Farella on the brief include: The Children's Law Center of Los Angeles, Family Equality Council; Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Therapists Association; the Human Rights Campaign; The Human Rights Campaign Foundation; Kids in Common; Legal Services for Children; the National Black Justice Coalition; National Center for Youth Law; the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation; PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbian and Gays Inc.) and the San Francisco Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA).

Hang Loose Rum v. Frank-Lin Distributors

Represented start-up alcoholic beverage company in lawsuit against co-manufacturing facility, on claim alleging negligent quality control caused product launch to fail. Case settled for $1.1 million on second day of trial.

BART v. GE Transportation Systems

We represented GE in a $500 million federal court litigation in the Northern District of California involving the development of an experimental train control technology for BART. The case successfully settled after a partial summary judgment motion knocked out BART’s breach of contract claim based on the exclusive remedy provision of the contract.

Brazil v. Dell Inc.

We defended Dell in a federal court consumer class action alleging false advertising and misrepresentations concerning product discounts and asserting claims for alleged violations of the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq., the False Advertising Law (“FAL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 et seq., the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750 et seq., intentional and negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and breach of contract.

MPS Acquisition, Inc. v Micro Power Systems, Inc., et al.

Defended Micro Power Systems, Inc. in a multi-million dollar suit for breach of contract, fraud and conspiracy resulting from failed acquisition negotiations.  Obtained judgment for the defendant, and then acted as lead counsel in a trial in Santa Clara Superior Court before the Honorable Conrad Rushing to successfully establish alter-ego liability against the principals of MPS Acquisition, Inc. to enforce recovery on cross-complaint. Obtained a verdict in favor of plaintiffs on all issues, which was affirmed on appeal.

Securities Fraud

Currently representing targets and witnesses in various securities fraud investigations and trials.

  • Representing targets and witnesses in various securities fraud investigations directed by SEC and U.S. Attorneys' Offices in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Washington D.C.
  • Tried complex criminal securities fraud cases to jury verdicts in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
  • Resolved federal criminal and SEC cases alleging revenue recognition fraud against former vice president of international sales of a publicly traded company.
  • Resolved federal criminal insider-trading cases against high-tech engineer and attorney, including successful motions for downward departure at sentencing and probation in both cases.
  • Defended former CFO in SEC investigation of revenue recognition and accounting fraud. No enforcement proceedings were filed.
  • Represented controller of publicly traded company in parallel civil actions and SEC/DOJ investigations arising from securities fraud actions stemming from merger of pharmaceutical companies.
  • Represented general counsel of public company in SEC investigation of possible SOX "reporting up" violation.
  • Represented current and former officers and directors in state and federal derivative and shareholder litigation arising from alleged options backdating.
  • Represented former outside director in state and federal cases brought by company special litigation committee against former management, board members, and others in connection with allegations of backdated stock options.
  • Represented special committee of public national bank in investigation of bank's compliance with anti-money laundering statutes and related regulations.
  • Representing CFO in DOJ prosecution and parallel SEC case relating to alleged backdating of stock option exercises and related tax evasion counts.
  • Defending the founder and former CEO of public software company in connection with an SEC enforcement case pending in the Northern District of California (San Jose) alleging revenue recognition violations.

Titeflex

Serve as national coordinating counsel for products liability litigation relating to gas delivery system, and products liability counseling relating to Prop. 65.

Visa v. Maritz

Represented Visa in connection with claims against Maritz arising out of Maritz's attempt to develop and deploy a points based rewards program for Visa and its members.

Boldryev v. Frankel

We represented the original developer of WinAmp, the industry leading MP3 player, involving claims of fraud, copyright infringement, and partnership accounting by an alleged co-developer, following the sale of the company to AOL.  The case was successfully resolved.

Chowdhury v. Northwest Airlines Corp.

With the American Civil Liberties Union, we are representing on a pro bono basis an American citizen of Bangladeshi descent, who was denied permission to board a Northwest Airlines flight shortly after 9/11, even after airport security agents and the FBI cleared the plaintiff to fly.  The case, filed in Federal court, alleges discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry and/or national origin.

Cox Communications

We have advised Cox Communications and its Bay Area television broadcast stations KTVU and KICU on matters pertaining both to business issues such as relationships with on-air talent and advertisers and to First Amendment issues such as the content of news broadcasts and responses to subpoenas and other inquiries directed to news reporters.  For example, the firm represented a KTVU/Fox reporter in motions to obtain access to wiretaps of his conversations with murder defendant Scott Peterson.

Deluxe Data v. Visa International, et al.

In this case, perhaps the first in the country tried under the “inevitable disclosure” trade secrets doctrine, the firm represented Visa, its data processing system, and seven individuals who were sued for having left the plaintiff en masse, allegedly with knowledge of source code and “know-how” related to the functionality in ATM machines worldwide.  The case was tried in state court in Milwaukee for approximately two weeks, and our clients prevailed on every count.  The decision in favor of our clients was affirmed by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

Dumas et al. v. The Upper Deck Company et al.

Defended an unfair competition class action brought in federal court in San Diego against a distributor of sports trading cards arising from its marketing and advertising practices.

Financial Security Assurance Antitrust Actions

Representing Financial Security Assurance Inc. ("FSA") in a series of cases brought by various municipal bond issuers alleging that FSA and a number of other municipal bond insurer defendants illegally agreed and conspired to artificially inflate the prices of municipal bond insurance in violation of the antitrust laws.  Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc. et al.; City of Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc. et al.; and City of Sacramento v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc., et al.