Sabrina Larson is an associate in the Litigation Department of Morrison & Foerster’s San Francisco office. Her practice focuses on a broad range of complex litigation, with a focus on intellectual property litigation, commercial litigation, and consumer class actions. She has litigated patent and trademark infringement actions, complex commercial actions, and consumer class actions in federal courts as well as proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Ms. Larson’s practice also includes domestic and international trademark prosecution, copyright and trademark enforcement, and advising clients on trademark and copyright issues, from registration to enforcement and licensing. In her pro bono practice, Ms. Larson represents clients in affirmative and defensive asylum cases and was part of a team that litigated a civil rights trial to a jury verdict.
Ms. Larson received her J.D. from the UCLA School of Law, where she served as the senior editor of the UCLA Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif. She also served as a research assistant for International Human Rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Ms. Larson served as a judicial extern for the Honorable John Kronstadt in the Central District Court of Los Angeles and a civil litigation law clerk in the Office of the City Attorney in Los Angeles. Ms. Larson received her B.A. summa cum laude in English from Carleton College, where she was a member of Phi Beta Kappa.
Prior to attending law school, Ms. Larson was an editor of anatomy and physiology textbooks for Pearson Education.
Text Message Class Action LitigationSuccessfully defeated putative class actions in two separate matters asserting Wiretap Act and tortious interference with contract claims regarding text messaging.
Uptime Energy, Inc. v. Up Energy Drinks LLC.(Central District of California). Represents an energy drink company that uses the UPTIME trademark and a distinctive white minimalist trade dress against another energy drink company that uses the UP trademark and a similar white minimalist trade dress. Obtained a preliminary injunction stopping use of the similar trade dress.
McCormick & Co. Incorporated v. Beaver Street Fisheries, Inc.(District of Maryland). Represented McCormick in a trademark infringement case filed against Beaver Street regarding the use of GRILLMAN’s for a line of seasoned meats.
Restoration Hardware, Inc. et al. v. Houzz, Inc.(Northern District of California). Represented Restoration Hardware in a trademark infringement case filed against Houzz regarding the use of RESTORATION HARDWARE and other trademarks on the Houzz website.
Good Technology Corp. v. AirWatch LLC(Northern District of California). Represented AirWatch in a multi-patent infringement suit brought by a competitor alleging infringement by AirWatch’s mobile device management software, achieving a favorable settlement for AirWatch.
Shipcom Wireless, LLC v. Catamaran Corporation and Catamaran LLC(Southern District of Texas). Represented Shipcom in a trademark infringement case filed against Catamaran regarding its use of CATAMARAN in connection with software and pharmacy benefit management services.
Electrified Discounters, Inc. v. MI Technologies, Inc.(District of Connecticut). Represented MI Technologies in a trademark infringement case filed by Electrified Discounters regarding listings offerings light bulbs in the Amazon.com marketplace and represented MI Technologies in connection with its counterclaims for unfair competition and trademark infringement. Reached a favorable settlement of all claims.
MI Technologies, Inc. v. Electrified Discounters, Inc.(District of Connecticut). Represented MI Technologies in a counterfeiting and trademark infringement case filed against Electrified Discounters. Obtained a TRO and preliminary injunction stopping the sale and distribution of counterfeit OSRAM-branded projector lamps. Reached a favorable settlement of all claims.
Endeavor Capital, LLC d.b.a. Granny8 Mortgage v. Credit Karma, Inc.(Eastern District of Missouri). Defended Credit Karma in a trademark infringement and dilution suit involving the use of a grandmother character in a telephone commercial.
Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.