Katherine (“Kathy”) Murray is a partner in Morrison Foerster’s Complex Litigation + Advisement practice group. She focuses her practice on defending clients in complex business litigation, product liability and consumer class actions.

Kathy has extensive experience trying jury trials to verdict and securing favorable outcomes for her clients. She has also litigated real estate, patent infringement, trade secrets, and business tort cases. Kathy’s clients span a wide range of industries, including food, cosmetics, and consumer electronics. She has also co-authored the practitioner’s treatise Enforcement of Judgments: A Practitioner’s Guide to Recovery.

Kathy defends clients in cases arising under state consumer protection laws, including California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. She has also handled matters involving federal environmental statutes, including CERCLA and RCRA.

Kathy is heavily involved in her community and served on the Board of Directors of the Serra Project, one of Southern California’s largest providers of low-cost housing for people living with HIV/AIDS. She is also an active alumna of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, where she served on the Board of Directors of the Law School Fund.

Kathy earned her B.A. in Diplomatic History and Political Science, cum laude, from the University of Pennsylvania, where she completed an Honors thesis, Cohesion in Crisis: An examination of U.S.-Latin American diplomacy in the months leading to and culminating in the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962. She received her J.D. from Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, where she contributed to Writing and Analysis in the Law, 4th ed. She was also Editor of the Journal of International Law and Business and a member of the Latino Law Students Association and the Student Bar Association.

Kathy is a native Spanish speaker.

Representative Experience

• Represented major food, cosmetics, and consumer electronics companies in nationwide and state consumer class actions arising under various consumer protection statutes, including California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
  
• Secured dismissal of a nationwide class action against a major cosmetics company that the plaintiff valued at $100 million.
  
• Defeated class certification in an action brought under California’s Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. The court found that requesting personal identification information violates the statute only when a consumer would perceive the request as a condition of using a credit card.
  
• Represented the claimant in a confidential environmental arbitration concerning unpaid response costs associated with an enforcement action by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. A three-judge panel awarded approximately $2 million in response costs, more than $650,000 in prejudgment interest, and more than $2 million in attorneys’ fees.
  
• Represented a California city in consolidated state and federal actions arising from contamination at the former Rialto Ammunition Backup Storage Point. The actions involved claims under CERCLA, RCRA, analogous state statutes, and common law.
  
• Represented New World TMT Limited in litigation against PrediWave Corporation, eight related companies, and its CEO. Obtained terminating sanctions and a judgment exceeding $2.8 billion, believed to be the largest judgment ever obtained by a Chinese company in a U.S. court.
  
• Won summary judgment for a multinational conglomerate in a breach-of-contract and fraud action arising from negotiations concerning medical device patents.
  
• Advised and represented major lending institutions in judicial foreclosure and receivership proceedings.
  
• Defended Taiwanese original equipment manufacturers in patent infringement actions across the country, including in the Eastern District of Texas, the District of Delaware, and the Western District of Wisconsin.
  
• Served as the primary drafter of post-trial briefs that reduced a $52 million verdict to $6 million. The remaining judgment was subsequently reversed on appeal, resulting in a complete defense victory.
  
• Helped prepare U.S. Supreme Court briefs arguing that the Ex Post Facto Clause prohibited the retroactive application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines that increased the client’s recommended sentencing range. The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in the client’s favor and reversed the appellate ruling.