Brooks M. Beard

Partner

San Francisco, (415) 268-7339

Download vCard

Education

University of California, Santa Barbara (B.A., 1991)
;
Vermont Law School (J.D., 1995)
;
Georgetown University Law Center (LL.M., 1996)

Practices

Patent Litigation

Litigation

Environmental Litigation

Bar Admissions

California
District of Columbia

Brooks Beard has a trial and appellate litigation practice focusing on complex commercial matters. He represents clients in state and federal court, as well as before state and federal administrative agencies, in connection with matters involving false or deceptive advertising, patent infringement, trade secrets, CERCLA/Superfund, California's Proposition 65, and constitutional conflict preemption. His clients come from a range of industries: mining, consumer products, Internet, technology, pharmaceuticals, financial, consumer retail, food products, and restaurants.

Mr. Beard sits on the Steering Committee for Morrison & Foerster's Cleantech Practice Group. In this rapidly-evolving area, he currently provides counseling and litigation advice on issues surrounding false or deceptive advertising allegations relating to environmental or "green" claims made by companies in connection with consumer products and services. He is also involved with patent infringement matters relating to Cleantech companies and subject matter.

In addition to the Cleantech Practice Group, Mr. Beard is part of Morrison & Foerster's Trial Practice Group, IP Litigation Practice Group, and e-Discovery Task Force.

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

While attending law school, Mr. Beard was a recipient of the Dean's Fellowship award as well as the University Award of Distinction for outstanding contributions to the community and academic excellence.

Matters.

Tillis v. Lamarque

(United States District Court, Northern District of California). Represented inmate in a prisoner\'s civil rights action involving an attack by gang members with the assistance and collusion of prison staff. Following extensive litigation, negotiated a very favorable settlement, including both monetary and injunctive relief. (2008)

Dowhal v. SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, et al.

(CA Superior Court, San Francisco County; CA Supreme Court). Won summary judgment in a Proposition 65 suit filed against SmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, and 15 other manufacturers, marketers, and retailers of Nicoderm CQ, Nicorette, and Nicotrol, smoking cessation products. The lawsuit alleged that the pregnancy warning language on the products did not satisfy Proposition 65 requirements. The California Attorney General intervened on behalf of the plaintiff, but the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of our clients. The Supreme Court’s decision was the first favoring a defendant’s position in a Proposition 65 action, the first holding that Proposition 65 could be and was preempted by federal law, and the first ruling that the State could not defeat preemption by requiring off-label advertising. (2004)

OpenTV, Inc. v. Liberate Technologies

(USDC, Northern District of California). Settled before trial a patent patent infringement case involving interactive television technology, on behalf of our client OpenTV. ([year?])