Intellectual Property is the lifeblood of the Bay Area. It must be protected.
A creative and strategic problem-solver, Frank Busch is an experienced litigator who has represented parties of every size in complex trial and appellate matters. Frank has experience with all phases of discovery, motion practice, mediation, arbitration, trial, and appeal, including a successful oral argument before the Ninth Circuit. Passionate about technology and informed by his Computer Science degree, Frank understands his clients, their business models, and their products and services. He also understands his clients’ need to protect their confidential information in a world where companies rely on that confidentiality to protect their critical intellectual property. Frank represents companies, along with state and local governments, in a broad range of disputes including software, contracts, unfair competition, and trade secret issues in both California state court and federal courts across the country.
Frank’s expertise in federal civil procedure is further reflected by his role as a contributing author to the Federal Civil Procedure Before Trial practice guide published by Matthew Bender, a platform designed to provide efficient and accurate guidance to practitioners in any federal district court and one of the key practice guides available on the LexisNexis research platform. Frank’s clients benefit from his up-to-the-minute knowledge of key civil procedure issues resulting from his work on this critical resource.
Frank also has an insider’s view of government law enforcement practices, having contributed to an investigation by the Northern District of California United States Attorney’s Office and the Department of Justice’s Mortgage Backed Securities Working Group that achieved a $2.6 billion settlement agreement with Morgan Stanley. This amount is the largest sum ever recovered in a civil case investigated by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California.
- The University of Chicago Law School, J.D. 2008
- Yale University, B.A., Computer Science (with Distinction) and History, 2005
- Selected by Super Lawyers (a designation reserved for the top 5% of attorneys in Northern California)
- United States Supreme Court
- Supreme Court of California / California State Courts
- United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Bar Association of San Francisco Litigation Section
Executive Committee, 2019-present
- Bar Association of San Francisco Intellectual Property Section
Executive Committee, 2018-present
- Federal Bar Association, Northern District of California Chapter
- Association of Business Trial Lawyers
- See Current News About Frank
- 2019: Moderated and spoke on panel regarding representation of international litigants in California state court.
- 2019: Moderated and spoke on panel regarding early mediation in IP litigation
- 2018: Moderated and spoke on the IP BYTES Trademark Law panel
- Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Sci. & Tech. Co. v. Rearden, No. 18-16859, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 24193 (9th Cir. July 31, 2020) (represented a major technology incubator in defense against claims brought by foreign company regarding ownership of technology used to create realistic facial animations for major motion pictures such as Beauty and the Beast and Deadpool. Obtained affirmance of a complete defense verdict)
- Cty. Inmate Tel. Serv. Cases, 48 Cal. App. 5th 354 (2020) (represented County of San Mateo against statewide consolidated constitutional claims arising out of inmate phone services. Obtained complete affirmance of demurrer)
- Seagate Technology LLC v. eSys Distribution, Inc., et al., No. CV-160181 (Santa Cruz Superior Court, 2019) (obtained order vacating judgment of $170,862,174, and quashing service, freeing client from both judgment and future participation in the litigation)
- Delta V Forensic Eng’g, Inc. v. Delta V Biomechanics, Inc., 402 F. Supp. 3d 902 (C.D. Cal. 2019) (obtained complete defense verdict on summary judgment in trademark dispute)
- Myrtle St. Flats LLC v. City of Vallejo, No. 2:17-cv-1662-JAM-KJN (Eastern District of California, 2019) (Obtained summary judgment order establishing city’s liability to real estate developer for wrongful seizure because developer had previously secured necessary approvals)
- Mocha Mill, Inc., et al. v. Port of Mokha, Inc., et al., No.18-cv-02539-HSG (Northern District of California) (obtained dismissal, with prejudice, of federal claims brought against clients based upon allegations related to the import of Yemeni coffee featured in the recent Dave Eggers book The Monk of Mokha on first Rule 12 motion)
- County Inmate Telephone Service Cases., No. 4897 (Judicial Counsel Coordination; Los Angeles Superior Court) (obtained order sustaining demurrers in full, without leave to amend, and fully disposing of the entirety of a consolidated set of cases on first demurrer)
- Jogani et al. v. Jogani et al., No BC290553 (L.A. Superior Court) (obtained a complete pre-trial defense verdict on allegations that client’s property—consisting of real estate claimed to be worth over $1B—was held pursuant to an oral partnership agreement compelling the majority of those holdings to be distributed to the plaintiff and cross-complainants in the action)
- Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Sci. & Tech. Co. v. Rearden LLC, No. 15-cv-00797-JST, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128105, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2017) (represented a major technology incubator in defense against claims brought by foreign company regarding ownership of technology used to create realistic facial animations for major motion pictures such as Beauty and the Beast and Deadpool. Obtained a complete defense verdict following a bench trial confirming that client owned all intellectual property and physical assets at issue)
- Opperman v. Path, Inc., 84 F. Supp. 3d 962 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (represented class against secret data theft by Path, and certain other iOS apps)
- Lopez v. Cook, 533 F. App’x 763, 764 (9th Cir. 2013) (briefed and argued appeal on behalf of inmate held in solitary confinement for over a decade without committing any violent act; adverse jury verdict vacated)
- Barrios v. Holder, No. 10-71617 (9th Cir. Dec. 9, 2010) (briefed appeal on behalf of asylum applicant wrongly placed in expedited deportation proceedings; defeated government’s motion to dismiss the appeal and thereafter obtained formal grant of asylum)