Todd M. Lander, Partner

Represented trademark owner in dispute with national manufacturer and distributor over trademark and trade dress rights to an entertainment property dating to the 1980’s. Successfully defeated abandonment defense before both the Trademark Trial and Appellate Board (USPTO) and the District Court, despite long period of non-use on the owner’s part.

Handled major trademark related dispute concerning rights to a mark in the direct marketing industry. The dispute specifically involved competing applications for the same mark to the USPTO and, by extension, questions regarding the priority of use of the mark in connection with pre-sale activities by the user of a mark. The case was ultimately settled on very favorable terms for the client.

Defended complex copyright infringement dispute involving previously un-decided issues concerning the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and the extent to which a foreign-based copyright owner must establish appropriate chain of title, and whether, and under what circumstances, the foreign owner is entitled to the presumption of validity of its copyright.

Handled myriad copyright, trade mark and trade dress, and design patent claims in the fashion and apparel industry.

Took case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, involving the efficacy of California’s 2003 arbitration disclosure requirements to self-regulating organizations such as the New York Stock Exchange and the National Association of Securities Dealers. The case implicated sophisticated issues of federal preemption, particularly concerning the application of the 1975 revisions to the Securities and Exchange Act, and generated significant media attention.

Acted for and successfully tried a dispute on behalf of a financial institution that saw its lessor’s interest in a commercial tenancy foreclosed upon, after which the foreclosing party petitioned for bankruptcy and the bankruptcy trustee rejected the lease under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code. The incoming lessor asserted that a attornment and non-disturbance clause in the institution’s lease compelled the institution to honor that lease – which was negotiated and executed at market values substantially in excess of those at the time of the foreclosure and bankruptcy – triggering a first impression case concerning the efficacy and implication of the attornment and non-disturbance provisions. Trial concluded in a judgment for the institution, on the basis that the foreclosure and the subsequent bankruptcy rejection had vitiated the lease notwithstanding the attornment and non-disturbance clause.

Successfully represented former owner of large commercial property against CERCLA contribution claims by present owner, after contamination was discovered on the property. The case entailed sophisticated issues of allocation of fault, and ultimately entailed defeating a summary judgment motion for indemnity filed by the client’s successor in interest (the client sold its business to the successor several years after vacating the property in question, and the buyer was sued as a successor) and pursuing summary judgment on the question of whether the client was an owner or operator under CERCLA. The case was resolved favorably while the latter summary judgment was pending.