O’Melveny’s advertising, marketing, and branding practice—an interdisciplinary team of corporate counselors, regulatory advisors, and veteran litigators—can help your company stand out in a crowded market. We counsel clients on every legal and strategic aspect of marketing and brand building, developing and protecting IP portfolios, assessing risks, and defending advertising and marketing strategies against challenges from consumers, competitors, and regulators.
We offer practical and timely strategic advice that helps clients build strong, protectable brands and head off potential issues before they escalate into costly conflicts. And should disputes arise, clients know our team has the experience to take on—and win—the most challenging cases.
- Advertising clearance and compliance, including claim-substantiation review
- Advertising contract drafting and review
- Brand and intellectual property audits and portfolio management
- Copyright, trademark, unfair-competition, idea-theft, and trade-secret litigation
- Domain name acquisitions and disputes, including UDRP proceedings
- Due diligence on intellectual property assets for M&A transactions
- Endorsement and sponsorship agreements
- False-advertising litigation under the Lanham Act and before the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division (NAD), Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), and National Advertising Review Board (NARB)
- False-advertising litigation under state consumer-protection statutes, including class actions and litigation by state attorneys general
- First Amendment and defamation disputes
- Food- and product-labeling compliance counseling and litigation defense
- Governmental investigations and litigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general
- Intellectual property assignments, clearances, and licensing
- Privacy compliance and enforcement (CAN-SPAM, CFAA, GDPR, and ECPA)
- Social media marketing agreements and compliance
- Sweepstakes, contests, gift cards, loyalty programs, and other promotions
- Trademark and trade-dress clearance worldwide.
- Trademark prosecution, registration and contested proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and international equivalents
- Trademark, trade-dress, and design-patent disputes before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and International Trade Commission (ITC)
Won dismissal of class action under California Invasion of Privacy Act challenging Fidelity Management’s use of voice verification technology to protect customers against potential fraud, and convincing plaintiffs’ counsel to drop virtually identical cases challenging technology used by TransUnion, Vanguard and T. Rowe Price.
Reached a favorable settlement in a putative class action arising from labeling claims regarding its over-the-counter pain reliever.
Successfully defended against a dispute alleging false and misleading business practices in the marketing and sale of its acne treatment mask.
Defeated a motion for preliminary injunction on behalf of Oasis West Realty, Inc., the developer of the Beverly Hills Waldorf Hotel, and its CEO, Beny Alagem, in a trade secrets case involving players in the Beverly Hills luxury hotel space.
Defended and prosecuted copyright and trademark/trade dress infringement claims in multiple matters. Obtained a complete defense verdict at trial against rival footwear maker Easy Spirit over its claims that Skechers’ “Commute Time” shoe intentionally copied the design and infringed the trademarked name of Easy Spirit’s “Traveltime” shoe.
Defended in litigation brought by the Federal Trade Commission, Attorneys General for 44 states and the District of Columbia, and private class-action plaintiffs concerning the marketing of Skechers’ “Shape-ups” rocker-bottom toning shoes, ultimately resolving the claims of all participants in a single global settlement.
Won dismissal of a class action alleging that Taco Bell overcharged customers for their Chalupa Cravings Boxes, which were advertised on television for $5 but cost $5.99 in some stores. We persuaded the court that while the ad's price disclaimer font was indeed smaller, it was “nevertheless clear and conspicuous.”
Won UDRP proceeding securing transfer of the Uniswap.com domain for the founder of the Uniswap protocol. In a novel case involving ownership of trademarks in the blockchain and DeFi space, the panel held that Uniswap had established trademark rights in the Uniswap trademarks, that the respondent’s registration and use of the Uniswap.com domain was confusingly similar to Uniswap’s trademark, and that the respondent’s registration and use of the domain was in bad faith.