Brooks M. Beard

Partner
San Francisco, (415) 268-7339
  • Print PDF
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • MoFolder

Brooks Beard has a trial and appellate litigation practice focusing on intellectual property (patent, trademark, and trade secrets), false advertising, and environmental litigation matters.  He also provides counseling and litigation advice on issues surrounding false or deceptive advertising allegations regarding environmental or "green" marketing claims relating to consumer products and services.  His clients have come from a wide range of industries, including Internet technologies, consumer products, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, financial services, food products, restaurants, and mining.

Mr. Beard sits on the Steering Committee for Morrison & Foerster's Cleantech Practice Group. He also serves on the Council of Legal Advisors and the Eco-Entrepreneurship Advisory Council at the Donald Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, the latter of which "guides, supports, and promotes eco-entrepreneurship education at the Bren School, and serves as the primary conduit between the school and the entrepreneurial and investor communities."

In October 2007, then-San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom appointed Mr. Beard to serve as a Commissioner on the San Francisco Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Board.  He was sworn in as a Commissioner in January 2008.

Mr. Beard's peers rate him AV Preeminent in The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings.

eTool Development, Inc. v. National Semiconductor Corporation
(United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas)  Representing National Semiconductor in a patent infringement case involving product design software.
Aloft Media, LLC and Stragent, LLC cases
(United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas) Representing or represented a total of eight defendants in twelve different patent infringement lawsuits filed by Aloft and Stragent, with technology relating to browser, toolbar, and instant message functionality, software for guiding a user through a decision-making process, network processors technology, and network router technology. Clients have included: Yahoo!; Huawei Technologies; Xelerated; Schwab; E*Trade; TD Ameritrade; Fidelity; and Cupid.com
Parallel Networks v. Restoration Hardware
(United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas) Represented Restoration Hardware in patent infringement lawsuit involving website functionality.
American Airlines v. Yahoo! Inc.
(United States District Court, Northern District of Texas)  Represented Yahoo! in a trademark infringement case relating to Internet advertising and keyword bidding.
HPD Laboratories, Inc. v. The Clorox Company
(United States District Court, District of New Jersey).  Represented The Clorox Company in a lawsuit alleging patent infringement of a consumer product packaging patent, and further alleging false advertising under the Lanham Act based on product label content.
OpenTV, Inc. v. Liberate Technologies
(United States District Court, Northern District of California).  Represented OpenTV in a patent infringement case involving interactive television technology.
K.C. 1986 Limited Partnership v. Reade Mfg. Co., et al.
(United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit; United States District Court, Western District of Missouri) For more than a decade, successfully represented U.S. Borax in a CERCLA case involving a former herbicide blending facility in North Kansas City, Missouri. Following trial, obtained a ruling assigning 90% of the response costs to other past and current owners and operators, and only a 10% allocation for Borax (itself a past operator).
Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc. v. East Bay Regional Park District
(United States District Court, Northern District of California).  Represented the East Bay Regional Park District in a CERCLA case involving a former landfill that was being converted into a shoreline regional park along San Francisco Bay. Following trial, obtained a ruling allocating 95% of the response costs to Waste Management, the former owner and operator of the landfill, and only 5% to the Park District, as the site’s current owner.
Loading...
Loading...