Protecting valuable intangibles.
Given the sums at issue, it is little wonder that policyholders look to their insurance policies to fund litigation costs and resolution of those disputes. But intellectual property infringement and unfair business practice disputes may not fall within the intended scope of a general liability policy’s coverage and may be a risk for which a different specialty product has been developed. Policy provisions may limit or preclude coverage for these exposures.
Intellectual property infringement and unfair business practice disputes present novel insurance coverage issues that can be misunderstood or overlooked by those less familiar with these claims. In contrast, our attorneys are familiar with these complex coverage issues and have been litigating these issues across the country for over a decade. Recognized as leaders in this area, our attorneys help clients assess their coverage obligations and formulate cost-effective plans for investigating, handling and resolving intellectual property infringement claims.
Representative Intellectual Property Infringement Matters Include:
- Prevailed on summary judgment finding umbrella insurer had no duty to defend insured in patent infringement lawsuit. Dish Network Corp. et al. v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. 1:09-cv-00447 (U.S.D.C., D. Colo. 2013).
- Attained ruling holding trademark infringement lawsuit did not trigger insurers’ duty to defend under general liability policies. Basalite Concrete Products, LLC et al v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., Case No. 12-2814 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal. 2013).
- Obtained affirmance of declaratory judgment finding “advertising injury” coverage did not extend to antitrust suit’s price-fixing allegations. Trailer Bridge, Inc. v. Ill. Nat’l Ins. Co., 657 F.3d 1135 (11th Cir. 2011).
- Ensured affirmance of summary judgment in favor of insurer in dispute involving trademark infringement prior to policy inception. Kim Seng Co. v. Great Am. Ins. Co. of N.Y., 101 Cal. Rptr. 3d 537 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
- Secured summary judgment finding no “advertising injury” coverage for patent infringement claim. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Walgreen Co., No. 07 CH 16703 (Ill. Cir. Ct. July 7, 2008).
- Obtained declaratory judgment for insurer holding underlying patent infringement claims did not involve “advertising injury.” Discover Fin. Servs. LLC v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 527 F. Supp. 2d 806 (N.D. Ill. 2007).