Robert Estrin focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation with 15 years of experience in handling high stakes litigation, including complex business litigation, intellectual property matters, class actions, and employment matters. Robert regularly represents Fortune 500 companies, small businesses, and individuals.
As an effective and efficient advocate, Robert focuses on obtaining great results while minimizing costs and inconvenience to his clients. With a background in economics from the University of Pennsylvania and over a decade specializing in litigation damages, Robert has a unique ability to appropriately value cases to further his clients’ interests.
Robert has tried numerous cases to verdict without a blemish on his record, results which are included in his representative matters below:
Complex Commercial Litigation
• Obtained an eight-figure verdict after a seven-day trial representing a private aviation company against its former Assistant Director of Operations for breach of contract and intentional interference due to his disruption of customer relationships.
• Secured a complete defense verdict on behalf of a manufacturer of medical apparel facing breach of contract and false advertising claims. After trial, the Court awarded his client over $500,000 in attorneys’ fees.
• Obtained an eight-figure settlement in partnership dispute after defeating defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a breach of contract and fraud case.
• Prevailed on a motion for summary judgment ending plaintiff’s case against a former CEO in shareholder dispute.
• Prevailed on summary judgment on behalf of a client accused of defamation, a judgment which was affirmed by the California Court of Appeals.
• Secured the dismissal of ExxonMobil Corporation from a mass tort case relating to the construction of apartment buildings in Los Angeles.
Intellectual Property Litigation
• Secured a defense verdict of non-infringement on behalf of Google, Inc. after a two-week trial in a patent infringement lawsuit relating to digital rights management technology.
• Successfully represented Sequenom, Inc., an exclusive licensee of pioneering patents relating to noninvasive prenatal diagnostics. Representation included winning an appeal to the federal circuit vacating the trial court’s denial of Sequenom’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Cleared Motorola Mobility, LLC against allegations of patent infringement on all five asserted patents.
• Obtained a seven-figure jury verdict on behalf of a subsidiary of Experian after a five-week trial in a cybersquatting and trademark infringement case.
• Obtained $250,000 in sanctions against defendant and its attorney due to defendant’s discovery abuses in a trademark infringement case.
Class Action Defense
• Obtained denial of class certification in defense of Avon Products against plaintiffs’ alleged claims of false advertising concerning Avon’s anti-aging products.
• Prevailed on summary judgment resulting in the dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act against The Walt Disney Company.
Employment Litigation
• Prevailed at trial on behalf of ExxonMobil Corporation in whistleblower lawsuit brought by a former employee. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the defense verdict on appeal.
• Successfully represented automotive technology company in arbitration against claims of harassment and discrimination brought by four Claimants.
Entertainment Litigation
• Successfully represented Grammy-winner singer and actress, Jill Scott, by obtaining a favorable settlement allowing her to proceed with her career under a new and more favorable recording contract.
• Successfully defended multi-platinum selling singer and television star, Brandy Norwood, against breach of contract claims.
Pro Bono Matters
• Represented several foster care parents to obtain the correct level of benefits to care for foster children with special needs.
• Prevailed on a writ of mandate on behalf of a foster parent by convincing the Superior Court of California to overturn the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, denying the client the appropriate level of foster care benefits, as well as awarding attorneys’ fees against Respondents.
