Minneapolis
P +1 (612) 492-6744
F +1 (612) 395-5451
Missoula
P +1 (406) 721-6025
F +1 (406) 543-0863
Select Section
Overview
BEN HELPS CLIENTS PROTECT THEIR INVESTMENTS AND GUARD THEIR REPUTATIONS IN HIGH-STAKES LITIGATION.
Ben is a dispute resolution attorney with wide ranging experience representing his clients in courts across the country.
Ben routinely serves clients in the health care, manufacturing, construction, and energy industries, as well as Native American tribes. They trust Ben’s judgment and strategic management of litigation costs to pursue favorable outcomes efficiently. Ben believes the best lawsuit is one resolved quickly, but he has the experience and dedication to press through lengthy and challenging disputes to achieve his clients’ goals.
Ben’s expertise includes environmental law disputes, patent, trade secret, and trademark infringement litigation, contract interpretation matters, employment disputes, and health litigation.
Ben maintains an active pro bono practice, including representing veterans pursuing the benefits they earned through service to our country. He also represents a Minnesota Native American tribe in child protection proceedings involving children subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act or Minnesota Indian Family Protection Act.
Ben volunteers on the board of directors of PAI, Inc., a non-profit day training and habilitation program that empowers the individual choices of adults with disabilities to achieve meaningful participation in and connection to the community. He also serves on the human resources committee of his church.
Education & Admissions
Suffolk University Law School (J.D., 2011), summa cum laude, Law Faculty Outstanding Student Award, Daniel J. Fern Award, Academic Leadership Scholarship, Suffolk University Law Review
Boston University (B.A., 2008)
Admissions
- Montana
- New York
- United States Patent and Trademark Office
- Maine
- Minnesota
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
- U.S. District Court for the District of Montana
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
- U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- U.S. Court of Federal Claims
- Tribal Court of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
Clerkships
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Associate Justice Ellen A. Gorman, 2011-2012
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Associate Justice Donald G. Alexander, 2012-2013
Experience
Client Achievements
Representative Litigation
- Sharot v. Water Gremlin Co., No. A22-0035, 2022 WL 4295381 (Minn. Ct. App. Sept. 19, 2022) – Successfully argued before Minnesota Court of Appeals, which affirmed summary judgment in favor of Dorsey’s client manufacturer. Court held there was no evidence that trichloroethylene (TCE) contaminated appellant’s property or that it interfered with appellant’s use of his property, and rejected claims for negligence and nuisance. Court also held that Minnesota law does not recognize stigma-caused diminution in property value as injury in tort.
- May v. Delta Air Lines, No. CV 21-710 ADM/ECW, 2022 WL 2835123, at *1 (D. Minn. July 20, 2022) – Won summary judgment on behalf of Dorsey’s client air line against former employee’s disability discrimination claim.
- Echo Bay Pharms., LLC v. Torrent Pharma, Inc., No. 20-CV-6345 (BCM), 2022 WL 2132964 (S.D.N.Y. June 14, 2022) – Represented pharmaceutical company against breach of contract claims brought by its co-developer. Co-developer dismissed its case after court rejected most of its legal theories.
- Vulles v. Thies & Talle Mgmt., Inc., 512 P.3d 248 (Mont. 2021): The Montana Supreme Court, ruling on an issue of first impression, affirmed the dismissal of class action allegations against Dorsey’s client at the pleading stage.
- Solutran, Inc. v. Elavon, Inc., 931 F.3d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2019) – Defended Dorsey’s banking industry clients in two-week patent infringement jury trial and prevailed when patent was invalidated as directed to ineligible subject matter.
- Loenbro Inspection, LLC v. Sommerfield, No. 18-CV-01943-PAB, 2018 WL 3659396 (D. Colo. Aug. 2, 2018): The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado entered a temporary restraining order in favor of Dorsey’s client, a Montana-based oilfield services company. The order barred the company’s former employees from using its custom configurations for phased array ultrasonic testing equipment in violation of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act.
- Alston v. United Healthcare Servs., Inc., No. CV 17-81-BU-SEH, 2018 WL 1382514 (D. Mont. Mar. 19, 2018): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana dismissed all claims against Dorsey’s clients, a national health insurer and a pharmacy benefits manager, concluding that the plaintiff’s challenge to their Medicare Part D coverage determination was preempted and subject to administrative exhaustion.
- Drake Water Technologies, Inc. v. National-Oilwell Varco, L.P., No. 6:17-cv-38-SEH, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85062 (D. Mont. Jun. 2, 2017): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana enforced a forum-selection clause and transferred to Texas a lawsuit against Dorsey’s client, a worldwide service and equipment provider to the oil and gas industry.
- Montana AFL-CIO v. McCulloch, 380 P.3d 728 (Mont. 2016): The Montana Supreme Court rejected a pre-election constitutional challenge to a citizen ballot initiative championed by Dorsey’s client. The initiative sought funding for biomedical research on brain diseases, brain injuries, and mental illnesses.
- Techmanski v. Quanta Field Service, LLC, No. CV-15-97-M-DWM, 2015 WL 7005617 (D. Mont. Nov. 2, 2015): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana decided Dorsey’s client, a Colorado company, did not subject itself to suit in Montana by acquiescing to its employee’s decision to occasionally work from his home there. The court held it lacked personal jurisdiction and sent the case to Colorado.
- Barite Partners LLC v. Stefan, No. 27-CV-14-17267, 2015 WL 6776450 (Minn. Dist. Ct. Oct. 30, 2015): Dorsey’s client, a Montana company, avoided entanglement in a Minnesota lawsuit after Dorsey convinced the court that the company had insufficient ties to Minnesota to warrant the court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over it.
- Wyo–Ben, Inc. v. Bixby, 339 P.3d 1255 (Mont. 2014): The Montana Supreme Court, ruling on an issue of first impression, agreed with Dorsey’s client if a shareholder asserting dissenters’ rights under Montana’s version of the Model Business Corporation Act demonstrates a material and adverse change to his or her individual voting rights “in respect of” all the shares owned by that shareholder, the shareholder is entitled to redemption of all shares, not only those shares that were directly and adversely affected.
- Standard Register Co. v. Keala, No. 14-00291, 2014 WL 3420785 (D. Hawaii July 11, 2014): The U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii rejected an attempt to obtain a temporary restraining order against a Dorsey client based on allegations of trade secret misappropriation and tortious interference with business relationships. After considering Dorsey’s opposition, the court held that the plaintiffs’ likelihood of success was so low that it did not need to weigh other TRO factors before denying the plaintiffs’ request.
- In re Mission Critical Data Center: After a five-day trial, a civil jury returned a verdict in favor of Dorsey’s client, a national design-builder, on its claims that one of its subcontractors was negligent in providing electrical design services for the construction and expansion of a Tier III data center for a Fortune 50 company.
- Rocky Mountain Biologicals, Inc. v. Microbix Biosystems, Inc., 986 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (D. Mont. 2013): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana awarded summary judgment for Dorsey client Irvine Scientific Sales Company on the plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference of contract. In addition to some favorable procedural rulings, the court found that Irvine’s good-faith assertions of its own contractual rights could not be tortious under Montana law.
News & Resources
Articles
August 8, 2023
December 29, 2022
July 21, 2020
June 24, 2020
January 02, 2020
August 2, 2019
June 21, 2019
July 10, 2018
June 26, 2018
The Work Product Doctrine, published in the Attorney-Client Privilege Deskbook (Minnesota CLE)
2018
February 02, 2017
February 2, 2017
DOJ Intervenes In FCA Suit Against Subcontractor That Allegedly Failed to Comply With Specifications
March 04, 2016
September 09, 2015
It Must Be Done!!?? Impossibility or Impracticability as an Excuse to Performance . . . Or Not, ABA Forum on the Construction Industry (with John T. Clappison & Jocelyn L. Knoll)
April 2014
News & Press Mentions
June 15, 2023
November 13, 2022
November 10, 2022
November 10, 2022
November 10, 2022
November 09, 2022
November 09, 2022
November 05, 2022
June 17, 2022
November 16, 2018
September 21, 2018
Events & Speaking Engagements
January 9, 2024
January 24, 2023
Remote Depositions in the Time of COVID, Minnesota CLE (with Tiana Towns)
March 3, 2021
The Work Product Doctrine, Minnesota CLE (with Briana Al Taqatqa)
December 12, 2019
Authentication and Admissibility of Electronic Evidence, Minnesota CLE (with Hon. Becky R. Thorson & Mary T. Novacheck)
July 31, 2019
Too Big, Too Small, or Just Right...? The RFP Process, 2019 CLOC Institute (with LaTrece Johnson, Suraj Prashad, and Gillian Brennan)
May 15, 2019
Civil Litigation A to Z: Case Management – Discovery Best Practices in Federal Court, Minnesota CLE
May 3, 2019
March 6, 2019
When the Red Phone Rings: Managing Litigation to Keep Costs Down and Clients Happy, From Crisis to Completion, 2018 CLOC Institute (with Paul Dieseth, Matt Wahlquist, and Jason Osnes)
April 24, 2018
Industries & Practices
Energy & Natural Resources
Explore This Practice View client achievements related to this practice View resources related to this practiceHealthcare & Life Sciences
Explore This Practice View client achievements related to this practice View resources related to this practiceHigher Education & Academic Research Institutions
Explore This Practice View client achievements related to this practice View resources related to this practiceIntellectual Property Litigation
Explore This Practice View client achievements related to this practice View resources related to this practice- Construction Litigation
- Electronic Discovery
- Energy & Natural Resources
- Healthcare & Life Sciences
- Higher Education & Academic Research Institutions
- Indian & Alaska Native
- Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Property Litigation
- Real Estate Litigation
Professional & Civic
Professional Achievements
- Ben maintains an active pro bono practice and is an Accredited Attorney with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
- Member, American Intellectual Property Law Association
- Member, American Bar Association Forum on the Construction Industry
- Member, Federal Bar Association
