Category Archives: Other Notable Wins

Riverdeep Inc., LLC, a leader in consumer software publishing, retained us to represent it in an action against Compact Media and its principal, Ivy Chi, in Federal District Court, Northern District of California, for copyright infringement based on unlicensed replication and sale of Riverdeep software.  Compact Media was a former Riverdeep licensee that continued to replicate and sell Riverdeep software after license expiration, and also replicated and sold Riverdeep software as to which it never had a license, while at the same time misrepresenting to Riverdeep that it had stopped all replication and distribution.  The Court entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting Compact Media from continued replication and sales of Riverdeep software, requiring that Compact Media return to Riverdeep all “gold master” disks, and granting Riverdeep expedited discovery.  Riverdeep Inc., LLC v. Compact Media Inc., No. 4:05-cv-03741-PJH (N.D. Cal.  Sept. 30, 2005). Thereafter, we obtained records from Compact Media’s replicators that, coupled with Compact Media’s own sales records, created an indefensible case for Compact Media.  The case settled shortly after a court mandated mediation, with Compact Media making a substantial payment to Riverdeep.

Toy manufacturer Mattel, Inc. and venture capital firm Gores Technology Group retained us to defend an action in the Federal District Court for the Central District of California, in which Beamscope sought approximately $3 million under breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and other theories arising from a credit balance running in its favor. Beamscope had sought protection from its creditors under Canadian law and this credit balance was a significant asset for the receiver. After a week-long trial, the court ruled in Mattel’s favor, accepting our argument that the credit balance was not convertible to cash and that Beamscope made no commercially reasonable demand for performance that could have precipitated a breach by the defendants. The court also dismissed the claims against Gores Technology Group as having no basis in law. Beamscope Canada, Inc. v. Mattel, Inc., No. 02-8066-CJC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2004). Mattel settled the case favorably prior to appeal.

Affinity marketing company Upromise, Inc. retained us to join its defense team in connection with an action entitled Savor, Inc. v. FMR, Inc. & Upromise, Inc., No. 00C-10-249-JRS (Del. Super. Ct.). Upromise turned to us as a less expensive lead counsel once the Delaware Supreme Court reversed a dismissal obtained by prestigious national counsel. Savor claimed that it had invented and disclosed to Boston-based Fidelity the college savings affinity marketing idea that is the basis of Upromise’s successful business model, and alleged that Fidelity leaked the idea to Upromise. Within weeks of our retention, we moved for summary judgment – even though it was very early in the case – ultimately resulting in the intended effect of limiting discovery to only the issues raised in our summary judgment motion. Once initial discovery was complete, we moved again for summary judgment, having avoided many months of expensive and intensive discovery for Upromise on otherwise irrelevant issues. On July 15, 2004, the Superior Court granted summary judgment on all claims, and on January 31, 2005, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment. Savor, Inc. v. FMR, Inc., No. 00-C-10-249 (Del. Super. Ct). See also Destination Marketing, Inc. v. Kessler Financial Services, L.P., Nos. 00-CIV-1177 & 00-CIV-11775-MEL (D. Mass. Nov. 2, 2001) (we obtained summary judgment for Upromise and certain officers and employees against claims similar to Savor suit).