|
Experience
Privacy, Security and Class Action Defense
Defense of Google, Inc. in Multiple Putative Class Actions re: BIPA and Google Photos
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Circuit Court of Illinois, Cook County
Circuit Court of Illinois, Will County
Lead litigation counsel for Google in multiple putative class actions alleging that aspects of Google Photos violate the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). Achieved dismissal on summary judgment of the claims in first-filed case for lack of Article III standing then defended these related cases in state and federal courts following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruling in Bryant v. Compass. Successfully resolved all claims in a favorable global settlement, currently pending final approval.
S.A. and P.B. v. University of Washington
Superior Court for the State of Washington, King County
Lead counsel for the University of Washington in putative class action arising from an alleged data breach involving the personal information and protected health information (PHI) of approximately one million patients of UW Medicine. Plaintiffs asserted multiple statutory and common law claims, including for violation of Washington’s Breach Notice Statute, Uniform Health-Care Information Act, AIDS Omnibus Act, and Release of Records for Research Act, as well as for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of express and implied contract, and unjust enrichment. Perkins Coie achieved dismissal of all claims with statutory damages at the pleadings stage, then twice defeated class certification, after which plaintiffs dismissed all remaining claims with prejudice.
Barnes v. Hanna Andersson et al.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Successfully defended Hanna Andersson in the first data breach putative class action filed under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), also alleging claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Cal. Civ. Code Section 17200, and for negligence. Obtained preliminary approval of class settlement with terms very favorable to Hanna Andersson, pending final approval.
Prelipceanu v. Jumio
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Circuit Court of Illinois, Cook County
Lead defense counsel defending claims alleging that Jumio’s facial recognition identity verification service violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA); resolved the case on terms very favorable to Jumio and achieved final court approval of settlement and denial of class member’s objection.
Svenson v. Google Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Lead counsel for Google in putative class action asserting violations of the Stored Communications Act (SCA), breach of privacy policies, and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). Obtained dismissal of SCA claims for failure to state a claim, dismissal of remaining claims on summary judgment based on lack of Article III and statutory standing, and denial of motion for class certification on typicality and adequacy grounds.
Archer-Hayes v. ToyTalk, Inc., et al.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
State Superior Court of California
Lead counsel for ToyTalk, Inc. (now PullString, Inc.) and Mattel, Inc., in a nationwide putative class action asserting claims for unfair competition, negligence, unjust enrichment, common law invasion of privacy, and violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act based on allegations that the “Hello Barbie” product violated the Children’s Online Protection Privacy Act (COPPA). Achieved voluntary dismissal with prejudice following our removal of the case to federal court and filing of motions to dismiss and to compel arbitration on behalf of ToyTalk and Mattel.
In re Google Buzz Privacy Litigation
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented Google in defense of consolidated nationwide class actions challenging Google Buzz social networking application, and asserting claims under Stored Communications Act (SCA), Federal Wiretap Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), and state law claims for public disclosure of private facts, California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Cal. Civ. Code 17200 et seq.), based on alleged violations of Gmail user privacy. Obtained court approval of class settlement, over multiple class member objections.
Rudgayzer v. Google Inc., Amalfitano v. Google Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Lead counsel for Google in putative class action challenging previous class-action settlement and asserting claims under the Stored Communications Act (SCA) in connection with the launch of Google Buzz social networking application. Obtained transfer of the case from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, then successfully defended that order before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Following transfer, the Northern District of California court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, a decision that was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and cert. denied by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Riccobono v. Blue Apron, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Defended Blue Apron, Inc., in a nationwide putative class action asserting violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and California’s Automatic Purchase Renewal Statute; achieved confidential settlement and stipulated dismissal after removal and transfer of case.
Government Inquiry/Fortune 50 Company
Federal Trade Commission, attorneys general
Represented Fortune 50 company in connection with multiple criminal and civil inquiries by government agencies regarding alleged collection and sharing of subscriber data without consent. Investigation closed.
Intellectual Property Litigation
Big Fish Games Inc. v. iWin Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Obtained preliminary and permanent injunctive relief for client Big Fish Games, in a case alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA), Unfair Business Practices Act, and other statutes, based upon a competitor’s unauthorized access to Big Fish Games’ proprietary and trade secret information. The case was favorably resolved, after substantial discovery, through a confidential settlement.
Bach, et al. v. Forever Living Products U.S., Inc., et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Defended litigation alleging copyright and trademark infringement of rights in the novel Jonathan Livingston Seagull.
Nintendo of America Inc. v. Chan, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Obtained permanent injunction and consent judgment on behalf of Nintendo against Internet seller of anti-circumvention devices, based on violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and copyright and trademark infringement.
Nintendo of America Inc. v. Winbond Electronics Corporation
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented Nintendo in litigation alleging infringement of intellectual property rights in video game software and hardware.
Swiniarski v. Hasbro Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Defense of action alleging copyright infringement in name, character and title of book allegedly infringed by video game software and related materials.
Commercial and Consumer Litigation
Socialzoid v. Google
Defended Google against claims by app developer for unfair competition and false advertising, seeking damages and injunctive relief. Motion to dismiss resulted in voluntary dismissal.
MagnaDrive Corporation v. Magna Force Inc.
Represented MagnaDrive in dispute over terms of patent license agreement and royalties due. Prevailed after multiday arbitration and obtained award to MagnaDrive for damages and attorneys’ fees.
MagnaDrive Corporation v. Magna Force Inc., Synergy GreenTech Corporation
Represented MagnaDrive in dispute with licensor and purported assignee regarding patent license agreement terms. Prevailed after multiday arbitration and obtained award to MagnaDrive of damages and attorneys’ fees.
Adaptive Engineering v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.
Represented T-Mobile USA, Inc. in dispute regarding provision of custom software and related services. Resolved through multi-day arbitration.
Roberts v. Musicians Institute Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Represented founder of Musician’s Institute in royalty dispute. Prevailed and recovered damages following two-week arbitration.
