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

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, focusing on intellectual property (patent, trademark, and trade secrets), false or deceptive advertising, and environmental litigation matters. His clients come from a range of industries, including Internet technology, consumer products, pharmaceuticals, financial, consumer retail, food products, restaurants, and mining.

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.

Since 2009, Mr. Beard has sat on Eco-Entrepreneurship Advisory Council at the Donald Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, 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, 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.

Aloft Media, LLC. v. Oracle, et al.

(United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas) Representing several financial services companies in a patent infringement case relating to software for guiding a user through a decision-making process.

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.

Seven Springs LP v. Fox Capital Management Corporation

(United States District Court, Eastern District of California) Representing property owner in litigation and administrative proceedings relating to contaminated property located in South Lake Tahoe, California.

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.

Aloft Media, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc.

(United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas). Represented Yahoo! in a series of patent infringement matters involving browser, toolbar, and messenger functionality.

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). Some opinions at: 472 F.3d 1009 (8th Cir. 2007); 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74042 (W.D. Mo. 2007); 33 F. Supp. 2d 835 (W.D. Mo. 1998)

Dowhal v. SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, et al.

(CA Superior Court, San Francisco County; CA Supreme Court). Won summary judgment in a Prop 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 Prop 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 Prop 65 action, the first holding that Prop 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)

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. Opinion at: 135 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (N.D. Cal. 2001)