Send to a friend

Karin Kramer has been a litigator for over 30 years in state and federal courts, arbitrations, and the ITC.  Her experience includes representation of both plaintiffs and defendants in individual actions and class actions.  She has litigated and tried cases concerning securities, data privacy breaches, products liability, patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, complex contracts, fraud, employment, consumer and mass tort cases.  She has also counseled clients regarding corporate practices to protect their intellectual property.
 
Ms. Kramer is a "Northern California Super Lawyer" as well as a 2010 "Top 50 Women Northern California Super Lawyer". She has taught at the National Institute of Trial Advocacy and the Ninth Circuit Federal Appellate Practice Seminar, and has been a speaker at numerous continuing education seminars offered by the Bar Association of San Francisco as well as private CLE providers.

DSM
DuPont Air Products Nanomaterials
Qualcomm, Inc.
LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc.
Harris Corporation
Digene
Charles Schwab Corp.
International Business Machines Corp.
Pfizer, Inc.

DuPont Air Products Nanomaterials v. Cabot Microelectronics.  Trial team member in this patent infringement case representing DA Nanomaterials of Tempe, Arizona, a joint venture between DuPont and Air Products. DA Nanomaterials defeated claims of infringement and willful infringement related to four patents covering chemical mechanical polishing of semiconductor wafers. Obtained verdict of non-infringement on behalf of client on all four patents-in-suit in Federal District Court in Phoenix, Arizona. (July, 2010)

Rembrandt Technologies v. Harris Corp.  Obtained summary judgment on behalf of Harris in case addressing cutting edge issues related to the application of standards commitments to subsequent assignees.

Tinkers & Chance v. LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc.  Represented a defendant in a suit for patent infringement related to electronic educational toys in the Eastern District of Texas. Achieved settlement extremely favorable to the client.

Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm, Inc.  Represented respondent before the International Trade Commission in a complex patent dispute involving handheld wireless devices. Obtained ruling from Federal Trade Circuit changing decades of law related to downstream relief.

Digene V. Beckman.  Counsel for Digene in arbitration before the ICDR regarding patent rights to HPV technology in which the panel found in Digene's favor.

DSM, BV v. Armor.  Obtained consent judgment against foreign infringer related to fiber used in life protection materials.

Kriton Medical v. Wampler.  In an arbitration by a medical device company against an inventor for breach of contract and theft of trade secrets, obtained an unusual arbitration award enforcing a restrictive covenant against an inventor.

Informix v. Oracle, et al.  In a suit by a former employer (Informix) against 12 former employees and Oracle Corporation alleging theft of trade secrets after employees left Informix en masse and joined Oracle, obtained a walk-away settlement and apology on behalf of former employees after a two-week trial of injunction phase.

Manufacturers Representatives v. Alliance Semiconductor.  In a suit by manufacturers' representatives against Alliance claiming breach of contract, obtained, on behalf of Alliance, reversal of a $98 million arbitration award and dismissal on summary adjudication of most claims. The remaining claim was settled for a small non-monetary consideration.

Maglica v. Maglica.  Represented a non-married business and domestic partner in a highly-publicized suit seeking compensation when the relationship ended. Obtained an $84 million verdict in the first trial. After reversal on appeal, and a second trial, obtained one of the largest settlements of its kind.

Electronic Arts et al. v. Yahoo.  Represented Electronic Arts and other video game companies challenging Yahoo!'s procedures for addressing on-line infringement, in one of the first cases brought under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Obtained a successful settlement leading to a change in procedures.

Clorox v. Competitor.  Represented Clorox in a trademark dispute challenging a competitor's marketing of a household product that competed with a highly successful Clorox household product. After an injunction hearing in federal court, the competitor withdrew the competing product.

Intel v. AMD.  Obtained the highly-publicized reversal of an arbitration award addressing rights to Intel's '386 microprocessor. The matter ultimately became part of a global settlement between the parties after a California Supreme Court decision.