Sabrina A. Larson - Coblentz Law

Details

P 415.268.0559

F 415.989.1663

slarson@coblentzlaw.com

Education

J.D., Order of the Coif,

University of California, Los Angeles School of Law (2013)
B.A., summa cum laude,

Carleton College (2004)

Practices

Intellectual Property

Litigation

Data Privacy & Cybersecurity

Sabrina Larson’s practice focuses on trademark and copyright clearance, prosecution, and enforcement, as well as complex litigation, with an emphasis on intellectual property and commercial litigation.

Sabrina represents clients in domestic and international trademark clearance, prosecution, and enforcement, including in proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), in Uniform Dispute Resolution Proceedings, and in federal court. She helps her clients navigate international trademark clearance and selection, and she creates, implements, and manages trademark portfolio strategies, and secures and enforces her clients’ trademark rights around the world. Her enforcement programs include online enforcement in combatting unauthorized distribution of products, cybersquatting, and other online infringements.

She litigates trademark infringement claims, state unfair competition, deceptive trade practices, trade secret, and false advertising claims in both business-to-business and consumer cases, consumer and privacy class actions, and other complex commercial actions. She regularly counsels and defends food and beverage clients on alleged false advertising and labeling claims under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act and other consumer and unfair competition laws, as well as on California’s Proposition 65.

Sabrina’s practice also includes licensing of intellectual property rights, conducting intellectual property due diligence in connection with mergers and acquisitions, advertising clearance, and advising clients on terms and conditions for websites, sweepstakes, and promotions, and on regulatory compliance for federal and state privacy laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act and California Privacy Rights Act.

She represents clients of all sizes in a diverse range of industries, including fashion, food and beverage, consumer goods, technology, pharmaceutical, and entertainment companies, retailers, wineries, advertising agencies, and museums.

Prior to joining Coblentz, Sabrina was an associate at Morrison & Foerster LLP in San Francisco. Before attending law school, Sabrina was an editor of anatomy and physiology textbooks for Pearson Education.

Sabrina is a member of the Copyright Society and the International Trademark Association (INTA) and has been a member of INTA’s Trademark Reporter Committee.

Sabrina earned her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, where she served as a senior editor of the UCLA Law Review, a research assistant for International Human Rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and was elected to the Order of the Coif. She received her B.A. summa cum laude in English from Carleton College.

Intellectual Property

Bold LLC v. Rocket Resume, Inc. and Stephen Zimmerman
(N.D. Cal.). Representing Defendants in a copyright infringement suit relating to online resume creation services.
Curcio v. Universal Music Group Holdings, Inc.
(Santa Clara Sup. Ct.). Defending Universal Music Group in connection with a trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract suit. Obtained a judgment following successful demurrers to repeated amended complaints.
Precision Build Corp. v. Precision Builders Group LLC & Dustin Baxter
(N.D. Cal.). Represented defendants in trademark litigation and business separation dispute, resulting in early negotiated resolution.
Eureka Chemical Company v. Kellsport Industries Inc.
(TTAB). Represented Opposer in opposition proceeding to final decision after trial sustaining opposition based on descriptiveness and lack of acquired distinctiveness.
Broadcast Music, Inc. et al v. Ghiringhelli Pizzeria Grill & Pub et al.
(N.D. Cal.). Represented Broadcast Music Inc. in copyright infringement action, resulting in early resolution.
Alcon Vision, LLC v. Allied Vision Group, Inc.
(S.D. Fla.). Represented Alcon Vision to enjoin sale of counterfeit contact lenses, resulting in a successful stipulated injunction.
The Museum of Modern Art v. MoMACha IP LLC et al.
(S.D.N.Y.). Successfully obtained a preliminary injunction enjoining use of the mark MOMACHA for an art-café.
Uptime Energy, Inc. v. Up Energy Drinks LLC
(C.D. Cal.). Represented plaintiff Uptime Energy in trade dress and trademark claims and obtained a preliminary injunction stopping use of similar trade dress.
Undefeated, Inc. v. Taly Williams
(TTAB). Defended cancellation proceeding to final decision after trial, resulting in maintaining registration for all primary goods.
Restoration Hardware, Inc. v. Houzz, Inc.
(N.D. Cal.). Represented RH in trademark infringement case regarding use of trademarks on Houzz website, resulting in favorable negotiated resolution.
Good Technology Corp. v. AirWatch LLC
(N.D. Cal.). Represented AirWatch in a multi-patent infringement suit brought by a competitor alleging infringement by AirWatch’s mobile device management software. The case settled after expert discovery.

Class Action and Commercial Matters

Rodriguez v. Endangered Species Chocolate
(S.D. Cal.). Defended Endangered Species Chocolate against false advertising class action regarding product labeling, resulting in dismissal of all claims after first motion to dismiss.
CalSafe Research Center v. Equal Exchange Inc.
(Alameda Sup. Ct.). Defended Equal Exchange against Proposition 65 claims, resulting in early dismissal from lawsuit.
International Manufacturer Product Defect Class Action
(N.D. Cal.). Defended international manufacturer against product defect claims alleging a nationwide class and nearly 50 state subclasses, which resulted in significantly narrowing the claims and repeatedly defeating class certification.
Wiretap Action against a Major Consumer Electronics Manufacturer
(N.D. Cal.). Represented a consumer electronics manufacturer in class action involving alleged violations of the Wiretap Act and unfair competition claims. Defeated class certification and achieved summary judgment in favor of defendant, which was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.