Litigation Highlights

Litigation Highlights

Megan O'Neill

Founding Partner, Litigation Chair

“In 2025, we continued to expand our work with marquee clients, taking on high-profile matters that test cutting-edge legal questions. Our class action defense practice remained a cornerstone, with our team handling complex, brand-impact litigation for household names. And we continued to deepen relationships with clients who return to us matter after matter because we prioritize their business objectives, not just legal outcomes.”

Patent

Represented retailer defendant in a patent litigation matter filed by a Non-Practicing Entity in the Western District of Texas. We filed a strong motion to dismiss which was taken off-calendar and under consideration. At the commencement of discovery, we presented strong evidence and arguments to plaintiff on the issues of non-infringement and invalidity. Plaintiff thereafter walked away by filing a voluntary dismissal.

Represented manufacturer of fish oil product in a putative class action in the Central District of California in which Plaintiff alleged the product was falsely advertised because (i) it was inefficacious, and (ii) Defendant failed to disclose an alleged potential increased rate of atrial fibrillation. Prevailed on a motion to dismiss by convincing the district court that Plaintiff's claims were preempted under federal law, and no reasonable consumer would be deceived given the disclosures on the bottle. Plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit but dismissed the appeal in July 2025 after the parties in this and a related case reached a global settlement.

Class Action

Class Action

Representing Defendant, a hair care company, in a putative nationwide class action in which Plaintiffs argue Defendant has falsely advertised its entire product line. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege Defendant's decades-long advertisement that its products are "not tested on animals" is untrue because Defendant sold products in China during a time period when China required animal testing of certain cosmetic products. Although the district court granted plaintiffs' motion for certification in part, DTO filed a Rule 23(f) petition that was granted by the Ninth Circuit. The court's order on certification is now on appeal.

Representing Plaintiff in a trademark lawsuit against entertainment company in connection with the use of an infringing mark in a major movie picture. After both the district court and the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Defendant, DTO filed a cert petition with the United States Supreme Court which was granted. The case was remanded to the district court, where the parties continued to litigate throughout 2025. DTO is ready to try the case in 2026.

Trademark Litigation

Class Action

Representing automobile company in a putative class action in which Plaintiffs allege certain vehicles were falsely advertised because no disclosure was made regarding the defect in a tow hitch wiring harness. The parties litigated the matter throughout 2025, with plaintiff filing a motion for class certification at the end of the year. The hearing on certification will take place in 2026.

Represented a media company in various trademark infringement actions against a promotor using the client's trademarks to advertise unsanctioned award show afterparties. In all instances, the court issued a permanent injunction against the promotor and awarded attorneys' fees and costs.

Trademark

Class Action

Represented a major CPG company in a putative class action brought by a California consumer alleging that the packaging for a baking mix misled purchasers about the amount of product contained within. The plaintiff asserted claims under California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act and common law fraud, seeking damages and injunctive relief. The court indicated it would grant our client's motion to dismiss, agreeing that clear quantity disclosures—including a yield chart showing the number of servings produced—defeated slack-fill claims as a matter of law. The plaintiff conceded he could not allege new facts and voluntarily dismissed the case that same day.