Attorney Detail Banner
Back to Attorneys
Kramer, Karin

Karin Kramer (Retired)

Partner

San Francisco
Tel: +1 415 875 6600 Fax: +1 415 875 6700

Karin Kramer, who was named as one of the Top 100 Women Lawyers in California, has litigated and tried cases in virtually every discipline.  She focused her practice on consumer class actions, products liability, and complex commercial cases, including data breach actions, antitrust, securities, copyrights, and trade secrets. She has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in many industries including high technology, pharmaceutical, e-commerce, automotive, personal care and food products, financial services, manufacturing, telecommunications, and medical devices.

Karin also received honors as a Northern California Super Lawyer every year since 2006 and was named a 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.

  • Barnes & Noble
  • Charles Schwab
  • Colgate-Palmolive
  • HotChalk, Inc.
  • Hyundai Motor America
  • IBM
  • Rhapsody International
  • Avery Dennison
  • Gentek Building Materials
  • Pfizer
  • Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble. Obtained dismissal with prejudice of putative nationwide consumer class action alleging claims under New York and California consumer protection statutes and the U.C.C.   Class had claimed over $100 million in damages.  No class was certified and plaintiff dismissed claim after Quinn Emanuel team exposed fatal factual and legal weaknesses in his case.
  • Jackson v. HotChalk. Obtained dismissal with prejudice of putative nationwide class action after winning motion to dismiss demonstrating that plaintiffs had suffered no harm and could not meet the requirements of Arizona’s  Consumer Telephone Solicitation Act or Consumer Fraud Act.
  • Plumlee v. Pfizer.  Obtained a dismissal with prejudice, on motion, of a sweeping class action against Pfizer, challenging the efficacy of its antidepressant, Zoloft. 
  • Whitaker v. IBM.  Won dismissal on motion on behalf of IBM in 9 consolidated class actions including allegations of a data breach involving IBM.
  • Bird v. Hyundai Motor America.  Defending Hyundai in a state court class action challenging Hyundai’s EPA miles per gallon ratings.
  • Smit v. Charles Schwab.  Won dismissal on motion of class action alleging securities fraud in connection with a Schwab mutual fund.
  • Downs v. Merk.  Won summary judgment on behalf of Charles Schwab entities, executives, and directors in a derivative and class action.
  • Northstar v. Charles Schwab.  Won dismissal on motion of class action alleging securities fraud in connection with a Schwab mutual fund.
  • Liberski v. Rhapsody International, Inc.  Representing Rhapsody International, a popular online music service, in class action alleging unfair business practices in connection with offers of free trials.
  • Gentek Building Materials.  Represented Gentek in a series of class actions throughout the country alleging breach of warranty and associated claims related to steel siding.
  • Abdurahman v. Hyundai Motor America and Abdul-Mumit v. Hyyndai Motor America.  Defending Hyundai in two federal court mass actions claiming that the company misrepresented its EPA miles per gallon ratings.
  • Emery v. The Colgate-Palmolive Company.  Defending Colgate in an MDL against claims that its liquid hand soap product did not meet certain product claims.
  • Pfizer, Inc.  Represented Pfizer in multiple actions alleging claims of injury  related to its marketing of Reglan.
  • Avery Dennison v. 3M.  Represented Avery Dennison, a leading manufacturer of retroreflective sheeting, in an antitrust action against 3M related to conduct before a standards committee and related market activity.
  • 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.
  • Boston University School of Law
  • (J.D.)
    • Stone Moot Court Competition:
      • Winner, Best Brief
      • Winner, Best Oralist
    • National Moot Court Team
    • American Jurisprudence Awards:
      • Corporations
      • Administrative Law
      • Evidence
    • Family Law Award:
      • Recipient
    • Commencement Speaker
  • Brown University
  • (B.A.)
    • Radcliffe Hicks Award for Intercollegiate Debate:
      • Recipient
    • Numerous team/individual speaker awards at intercollegiate debate tournaments:
      • Recipient
The State Bar of California; United States Supreme Court; United States Court of Appeals: Ninth Circuit, Federal Circuit; United States District Courts: Eastern District of Texas, District of Delaware, Central District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California, Eastern District of California, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Western District of Virginia; United States International Trade Commission
  • Keker & Van Nest
  • Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein
  • In 2013, selected as one of the Top 100 Women Lawyers in California by the Daily Journal.
  • Northern California SuperLawyer, 2006-2015.
  • Top 50 Women Northern California SuperLawyer.
  • "Central Bank In The Era Of Supersize Securities Fraud." Securities Litigation Reporter (2005). 
  • "Will The Supreme Court Federalize Class Actions?" Forum (October 2002). 
  • "Mediation and Arbitration of IP Disputes." San Francisco Bar Association, (2007). 
  • "Appellate Practice." Bridgeport Legal Education, (2007). 
  • "Mentoring Women Lawyers." San Francisco Bar Association, (2007). 
  • "Women In The Courtroom." San Francisco Bar Association, (2007). 
  • "Ninth Circuit Appellate Practice Workshop." California Bar, (2004-2006). 
  • Hastings College of Law: Professor of Legal Research and Writing, 1981-1982
  • NITA Trial Practice Program for Women: Instructor, 1998
  • Board of Directors, San Francisco Legal Aid
  • Board of Directors, Nepal Youth Foundation