J. Michael Keyes

Intellectual Property

• Stitch Editing, Ltd. V. TikTok, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, (2023)(Blumenfeld, J.) Defending TikTok against claims of alleged trademark infringement with respect to its use of the term “Stitch” in the TikTok app.
• Instructure, Inc. v. Canvas Tech, U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, (2022)(Kimball, J.) Assisted trial team in obtaining preliminary injunction against Defendant’s use of the infringing mark “Canvas.”
• A Parent Media v. Genius Brands International, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, (2021) (Wilson, J.) Successfully obtained preliminary injunction against use of infringing and misleading Google Ads campaign that advertised and promoted Defendant’s competing entertainment platform and mobile app.
• Tee Turtle v. Anhui Leadershow et al., U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, (2021) (Marshall, J.) In two cases involving nearly 300 foreign defendants selling infringing products through Dhgate.com and Alibaba.com, obtained TROs and preliminary injunctions halting willful and intentional infringement under the Lanham Act and the Copyright Act.Secured final judgments and attorneys’ fees in excess of $5,000,000.
• Tee Turtle v. Cukurova, U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, (2021) (Hegerty, J.) Obtained final judgment and permanent injunction against party selling infringing consumer products that achieved widespread recognition from viral TikTok videos.
• Tee Turtle v. Albayrak, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, (2021) (Rice, J.) Obtained final judgment and permanent injunction against party selling infringing consumer products that achieved widespread recognition from viral TikTok videos.
• Cooley v. Target, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, (2020) (Carter, J.) Defeated Plaintiff’s venue arguments and obtained transfer of Plaintiff’s claims for copyright infringement to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.
• VNS Federal Services v. Portsmouth Mission Alliance, U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, (2019) (Winmill, J.) Defeated Plaintiff’s motion for TRO and Preliminary Injunction against Prime Contractor on a Department of Energy nuclear facility in Ohio. Plaintiff’s complaint and evidentiary submissions included allegations of irreparable harm involving trade secret misappropriation and loss of goodwill.
• Bond v. Costco et al. and Corker v. Costco, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, 2019 (Lasnik, J). Defended national grocery chain in class action lawsuit alleging false and misleading claims related to the marketing and distribution of Kona coffee products.
• Pierson v. Facebook, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2019. Represented Facebook against claims of copyright infringement brought by notorious “copyright troll” attorney Richard Liebowitz.
• Fierce, Inc. v. Franklin Covey Co., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, 2018 (Pechman, J.) Successfully obtained Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiff’ trade dress claims related to its books and conference materials on behalf of company that publishes 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.
• TeeTurtle, LLC v. Vallejo, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 2018 (Sippel, J). Obtained permanent injunction against former employee for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Defend Trade Secrets Act.  
• J Barbour & Sons v. Levi Strauss & Co., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2018 (Preska, J.). Represented U.K. Company and its U.S. subsidiary for declaratory judgement of non-infringement and non-dilution of Levi Strauss’s “tab” trademarks. 
• Red Lion Hotels v. Khan et al, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, 2017 (Rice, J.). Obtained preliminary injunction against defendants’ infringing use of Red Lion trademarks at hotel properties located in Denver and Ft. Collins.  Also obtained $1,000,000 arbitration award for Red Lion in ancillary arbitration proceeding.  
• MetaMetrics, Inc. v. NWEA, U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, 2017 (Brown, J.). Pursued claims for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and false advertising against company that administers “Measures of Academic Progress” testing (or “MAP” testing) to schools, districts, and educational agencies throughout the country. Case settled approximately 5 weeks after MetaMetrics filed its complaint. 
• The Pokémon Company International, Inc. v. Tee Turtle, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, 2017 (Lasnik, J.). Defended Tee Turtle against copyright infringement claims seeking multi-million dollar damage award. The dispute involved several novel legal issues including First Amendment protection for “mash-ups” and copyright enforcement. Case settled during mediation.
• Abercrombie & Fitch v. Carter’s, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, 2017.Represented Abercrombie & Fitch in trademark and copyright infringement litigation involving the iconic and famous A&F moose logo and design. Case settled at mediation. 
• InternMatch, Inc. v. Nxtbigthing, LLC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2016 (Tigar, J.). Represented plaintiff in obtaining summary judgment on infringement and trademark cancellation claims. It was also established defendants willfully destroyed electronic evidence resulting in sanctions and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.
• Accusoft Corporation v. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, 2016 (Hillman, J.).  Represented Quest Diagnostics in copyright infringement and breach of contract action over medical diagnostics computer software developed by Quest Diagnostics. Case settled.  
• Foot Locker v. Vizant, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2015 (Gardephe, J.). Represented Foot Locker in case involving claims of copyright and trademark infringement. Case settled.
• Island Company, LLC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, 2014 (Dimitrouleas, J.).  Represented Abercrombie & Fitch in case involving alleged trademark infringement. Case settled after Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss Abercrombie’s counterclaim for fraud on the USPTO.
• Turcios v. Carma Laboratories, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, 2014 (Bernal, J.). Successfully opposed certification of class in a class action suit brought against manufacturer of Carmex® lip balm for alleged false advertising in violation of California’s unfair competition laws.
• Burnett v. Robert Bosch, LLC, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 2014 (Covington, J). Defended Robert Bosch against class action suit involving advertisement of Platinum Series spark plugs.
• Beats Electronics, LLC v. Yamaha, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, 2013 (Carney, J.). Represented Beats in case involving claims of trade dress and design patent infringement. Case settled at mediation.
• Rovio Entertainment, Ltd. v. Angry Clubs, LLC, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, 2013 (Cooke, J.). Obtained Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction against Defendants’ infringing and diluting use of “Angry Clubs” on golf clubs and related merchandise.
• San Miguel v. Ramar Foods, International, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, 2012 (Klausner, J). Obtained summary judgment on Ramar’s trademark infringement claim over San Miguel’s use of the trademark “Magnolia.”
• Cervecería Modelo v. Winery Exchange, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 2012. Represented Cervecería Modelo in trade dress infringement claim involving the famous Corona® trade dress. Case settled after Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction were filed.
• Sara Lee Corp. v. Kraft Global Foods, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 2011. Represented Kraft Foods in highly-publicized trial involving claims of false advertising of hot dog products. Case settled during trial.
• Del Monte Fresh Produce v. Tsigaris, et al, U.S. District Court Northern District of California, 2011 (Illston, J). Action for trademark infringement and unfair competition resulted in final judgment and permanent injunction against Defendant’s continued use of infringing name and trademark.
• Wall Mountain v. Edwards, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2010 (Trumbull, J). Obtained Summary Judgment on claims of willful trademark and copyright infringement for Defendant’s copying and selling DVDs on eBay. Obtained permanent injunction and $50,000 statutory damages award under the Copyright Act.
• Sand Hill Advisors v. Sand Hill Advisors, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2010 (Armstrong, J.). Successfully obtained Summary Judgment against Plaintiff on its claims of willful trademark infringement involving Defendant’s use of the name “Sand Hill Advisors.”
• Helly Hansen v. Ecolab USA, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, 2010. Declaratory Judgment Action filed on behalf of Helly Hansen involving its high end clothing product “Ekolab.” Case resulted in parties entering into co-existence agreement permitting Helly Hansen’s continued use of Ekolab.
• Quest Diagnostics, Inc. v. The Dark Report, U.S. District Court for New Jersey, 2009. Lawsuit involved claims of false advertising and unfair competition involving medical products and services. Resolution involved corrective advertising being issued by Defendants.
• Levi Strauss & Co. v. Abercrombie & Fitch, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2008 (jury trial). Defended Abercrombie & Fitch against claims of trademark infringement, trademark dilution and unfair competition. Jury trial resulted in unanimous defense verdict for Abercrombie & Fitch on all counts. Levi Strauss appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and on remand voluntarily dismissed its remaining dilution claim with prejudice.
• Levi Strauss & Co. v. Esprit U.S. Distribution, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2008 (Illston, J.). Defended against claims of trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition. Case settled.
• Brett Bros. Sports International, Inc. v. Easton-Bell Sports, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, 2007. Represented Brett Bros. in federal litigation involving claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act over the Defendants' use of the trademark “Stealth” on baseball bats and related equipment. Defendants settled all claims pursuant to confidential agreement one month after lawsuit was filed.
• Farmers Insurance Group v. Guerrero, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, 2006. Defended creator of a Farmers Insurance Internet “gripe site” against claims of trademark infringement and unfair competition. Plaintiff dismissed all claims after Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was filed.
• Arctic Circle Enterprises v. Alaska Juneau Mining Company, U.S. District Court of Alaska, 2006. Case settled after mediation.
• Sentinel Healthcare Systems v. A+ Computer Solutions, Ada County District Court, Boise, Idaho, 2006. Represented medical services company in dispute regarding copyright ownership of computer software program. Case resolved through settlement on mutually-agreeable terms.
• Central Mfg. Co. v. George Brett, 2005 WL 2445898, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Coar, J.). Successfully Defended George Brett and Brett Bros. Sports International, Inc. in federal trademark infringement and unfair competition action. The District Court entered summary judgment in favor of Brett, cancelled Plaintiff's federal trademark registration, and ordered Plaintiff to pay attorney's fees and costs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. Central Mfg., Inc. v. Brett, 492 F.3d 876, 882 (7th Cir. 2007).
• Community ISP v. Wholesale ISP, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington 2004 (McDonald, J.). Represented Plaintiff in copyright infringement action involving infringement of web- based software program. Case resolved through settlement.
• Lavasoft v. Gotts, U.S. District Court of Oregon, 2005 (Brown, J.). Defended claim for alleged trademark infringement, dilution, and cybersquatting involving alleged damages in excess of seven figures. Plaintiff agreed to settle all claims soon after it was unsuccessful in prevailing on its dispositive motion.
• Golf Ideas v. Zuzelo, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, 2002. Represented Defendant in alleged claim of copyright infringement of database. Case settled.

General Litigation

• Blanchat v. Smash My Trash, (2022). Represented aggrieved franchisee in week-long arbitration and obtained multi-million dollar award.
• CDTFA v. First American Petroleum (2021). Prevailed in decade long dispute with the CDTFA regarding whether the Yakama Treaty of 1855 precluded State of California from imposing excise taxes on First American’s petroleum products. CDTFA dismissed administrative action and claim for payment of excise taxes in excess of $100,000,000.
• First American Petroleum v. California Board of Equalization (2018). Prevailed in multi-year litigation over California Public Records Act.  Trial court held BOE violated CPRA and ordered production of previously withheld documents.  First American Petroleum awarded $500,000 in attorneys’ fees.
• Vizant v. Foot Locker (2016). Represented Foot Locker in breach of contract action alleging multi-million dollar damages claim. Case settled during mediation. 
• P.E. Systems, LLC v. CPI Corp., 289 P.3d 638 (2012). Washington Supreme Court unanimously reversed Court of Appeals’ decision involving commercial contract dispute between the parties.
• Salton Sea Ventures v. First American, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, 2011 (Gonzalez, C.J.). Defeated Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction under California unfair competition and related statutes. Court held imposing state excise tax on First American's fuel distribution business would "constitute a restriction on the Yakama's transportation of fuel into California and violates the Yakama's rights under the Treaty of 1855." See Salton Sea Venture, Inc. v. Ramsey, 2011 WL 4945072, 7 (S.D.Cal.2011). Plaintiff dismissed case thereafter.
• Yakama Indian Nation v. Gregoire, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, 2008. Obtained preliminary injunction on behalf of Yakama Indian Nation restraining the enforcement of RCW 82.24 against the Yakama Tribe and the Yakama Commerce Association.
• Ramsey v. Gregoire, Yakama Nation Tribal Court, 2008. Obtained permanent injunction precluding enforcement of compact agreement without compact being approved by general council of the Yakama Indian Nation.
• Rodriguez v. McCain Foods, USA, Inc., 2005 WL 3132483, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington (Whaley, J.) (bench trial). Co–tried and defended an employment discrimination case on behalf of McCain Foods. A bench trial before the Hon. Robert Whaley resulted in judgment being entered in favor of McCain on all of Plaintiff’s claims.
• Palouse School District v. PBI, Inc., Whitman County Superior Court, Colfax, Washington, 2005. Successfully represented Palouse School District in obtaining judgment against building contractor for breach of contract. Judgment included a damages award in excess of $300,000 plus an award of attorney’s fees and costs.
• P.E. Systems v. CPI Corp., Spokane County Superior Court, Spokane, Washington, 2010. Obtained dismissal of Complaint with prejudice on behalf of publicly-traded company, CPI Corp., for claims that it allegedly breached a written contract and breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Pro Bono Appellate

• Muhlenkamp v. Blizzard, 521 F. Supp. 2d 1140 (2007) (Shea, J.) (bench trial). Lead counsel representing father in trial under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Relief denied under Hague Convention.
• Wheeler v. Townsend, 2004 WL 1238867, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Appointed as counsel for inmate pursuant to federal pro bono program. Successfully argued for reversal of summary judgment entered by trial court against inmate on his federal civil rights claims against Director of the Idaho Department of Corrections and other officials. Reversed and remanded.
• Durrell v. Cook, 2003 WL 21782653, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Appointed as counsel for inmate pursuant to federal pro bono program. U.S. District Court of Oregon entered summary judgment in favor of Oregon Dept. of Corrections on inmate’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Successfully argued there were issues of fact as to whether officials acted with deliberate indifference to inmate’s safety. Reversed and remanded.