Decrease Font Size
Increase Font Size

News & Articles

By: Justin Donner and Shane Smith

In August 2017, the Ninth Circuit weighed in on an active circuit split in trademark law when it held that the junior user of a mark may not raise the Tea Rose-Rectanus doctrine as an affirmative defense to infringement if the junior user had knowledge of the senior user’s prior use of that mark.  Stone Creek, Inc. v. Omnia Italian Design, Inc., 875 F.3d 426, 436-39 (9th Cir. 2017).  This article takes a another look at the availability of the Tea Rose-Rectanus defense in the Ninth Circuit now that the U.S. Supreme Court has denied certiorari on that issue.

By: Lee Gorlin

Social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, have become such an important part of life and practice in the 21st century that many attorneys, legal support staff and even clients cannot remember a time without it. Social media, like any other medium, presents both opportunity and risks.

By: Laura A. Wolfe

Continuing its trend towards limiting the rights of California employers, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling earlier this week which effectively makes it impossible for employers to correctly classify workers as independent contractors instead of employees.  In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, the Court considered the question of who qualifies as an employee and who qualifies as an independent contractor for purposes of the California Wage Orders, and ultimately adopted the “ABC” test (spoiler alert: its not very friendly to employers).

By: Michael G. Woods

On April 9, 2018, an En Banc panel of 11 judges in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court unanimously held that “prior salary alone or in combination with other factors cannot justify a wage differential” between men and women.  Rizo v. Yovino, No. 16-15372. 

By: Dave McNamara

I am surprised how many employers, even those that use payroll companies, have wage statements that are not in compliance with California law.

By: Vanessa M. Cohn

In September 2017, the First Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal rocked the status quo with a brutal holding for employers.

By: Christina Tillman

The following is a summary of significant changes for employers in 2018 and a few of the changes from 2017 that you may have missed:

By: Mandy Jeffcoach

The California State Bar in Formal Opinion No. 2015-193 has advised that an attorney risks violating the ethical duty of competence if he fails to adequately understand and perform e-discovery—that is, discovery of electronically stored information (ESI).


With tightening venue rules for patent cases, the United States Supreme Court held that a domestic corporation "resides" only where incorporated for purposes of the patent venue statute in 28 U.28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).


The Board of Governors of the California State Bar appointed McCormick Barstow attorney Tim Sullivan to a three-year term as a member of the Executive Committee of the Litigation Section. Tim is the only member from the San Joaquin Valley.