Skip to content

Christopher Larus

  • Home
  • RSS
  • Contact
  • Client Extranet
  • 800.553.9910
  • Lawyers
  • Results
  • Firm
    • Who We Are
    • Diversity and Inclusion
    • Legal Project Management
    • Pro Bono and Community
    • Rankings and Recognition
    • Strategic Alliances
    • Trial Practice Center
  • Industries
    • Entertainment and Media
    • Financial
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health and Life Sciences
    • Insurance
    • Manufacturing
    • Retail
    • Technology
  • Services

    Business Litigation

    • American Indian Law and Policy >
      • Commercial Disputes and Gaming Rights
      • Government Investigations and Agency Disputes
      • Judicial Systems and Public Safety
      • Natural Resources
      • Personal Injury in Indian Country
      • Tribal Boundary Disputes
    • Antitrust and Trade
      Regulation >
      • Counseling and Compliance
      • Opt-Out Practice
      • Settlement Claims Analysis
    • Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
    • Class Action Litigation
    • Construction
    • Employment
    • Entertainment and Media Litigation
    • Financial Markets Litigation >
      • FINRA Broker-Dealer
    • Franchise and Dealership
    • Government and Internal
      Investigations
    • Health Care Litigation
    • Real Estate Litigation
    • Restructuring and Business Bankruptcy >
      • Acquisition and Sales
      • Committee Representation
      • Creditor Representation
      • Debtor Representation
      • Restructuring and Workout
    • Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes >
      • Conservatorship and Guardianship
      • Wealth Planning and Administration

    Intellectual Property and
    Technology Litigation

    • 3D Printing
    • Clean Technology
    • Copyright
    • Global Business and Technology Sourcing
    • Hatch-Waxman Litigation
    • International Trade Commission
    • License Disputes
    • Patent Litigation
    • Patent Office Trials
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity Litigation
    • Private Equity/Venture Capital
    • Software
    • Strategic IP Monetization
    • Trade Secret
    • Trademark, Advertising, and Brand Litigation

    Insurance and Catastrophic Loss

    • Admiralty and Maritime
    • Appraisal and Reference
    • Commercial Liability Coverage
    • Commercial Property Coverage
    • Construction
    • Subrogation

    Disciplines

    • Domestic and International Arbitration
    • Electronic Discovery
    • Water

    Business Transactions

    • Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
    • Corporate Finance and Securities
    • Corporate Governance and Special Situations
    • Mergers and Acquisitions

    Personal Litigation

    • Mass Tort Attorneys
    • Medical Malpractice Attorneys
    • Personal Injury Attorneys
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity Litigation
    • Wealth Planning and Administration
  • Resources
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Legal Updates
    • News
    • Press Room
    • Events
    • Video Library
    • Webinars
  • Offices
    • Bismarck
    • Boston
    • Los Angeles
    • Minneapolis
    • Naples
    • New York
    • Silicon Valley
    • Sioux Falls
  • Careers
    • Associates
    • Summer Associates
    • Staff
    • Staff Attorneys
    • Project Review Attorneys
  1. Lawyers
  2. Christopher Larus
Christopher Larus

Christopher K. Larus

Partner;
Chair, National IP and Technology
Litigation Group
CLarus@RobinsKaplan.com

Any information that you send us in an e-mail message should not be confidential or otherwise privileged information. Sending us an e-mail message will not make you a client of Robins Kaplan LLP. We do not accept representation until we have had an opportunity to evaluate your matter, including but not limited to an ethical evaluation of whether we are in a conflict position to represent you. Accordingly, the information you provide to us in an e-mail should not be information for which you would have an expectation of confidentiality.

If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.

By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.


1.800.553.9910 or 612.349.0116
    • Minneapolis
    • New York
"A trial lawyer focused on helping inventors, developers, authors, and brand holders maximize the value of their intellectual property."

Practice Areas

  • Business Litigation
  • Copyright
  • Domestic and International Arbitration
  • Global Business and Technology Sourcing
  • Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
  • International Trade Commission
  • License Disputes
  • Patent Litigation
  • Trade Secret
  • Trademark, Advertising, and Brand Litigation

Industries

  • Manufacturing
  • Technology
  • Education
    • University of Minnesota, J.D., cum laude
    • University of Wisconsin, Madison, B.S.
  • Professional Associations
    • American Arbitration Association Commercial Disputes Panel, Member
    • World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Center For Dispute Resolution, Member
  • Bar Admissions
    • Minnesota
    • New York
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
    • U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
    • U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York
    • IP Star 2018
    • IAM Patent 1000
    • Super Lawyers 2018
  • Experience

    Innovation is the lifeblood of the American economy. For more than 25 years, Chris has helped his clients protect their intellectual property rights. He tries complex patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, and licensing cases. He represents both plaintiffs and defendants in courts throughout the country, and in both national and international arbitration.

    Chris chairs Robins Kaplan’s national Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation practice. He works with clients to protect and monetize intellectual property assets outside of disputes context. He has extensive experience planning and implementing licensing campaigns involving a broad range of intellectual property assets and technologies. He works to tailor licensing and enforcement strategies designed to maximize each clients’ return on innovation.

    In addition to directly advocating for his clients, Chris has extensive experience as an arbitrator in both national and international arbitration. He serves as an appointed arbitrator in disputes before the American Arbitration Association (AAA), International Centre For Dispute Resolution (ICDR), World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC). Chris has repeatedly been named a Super Lawyer and listed in The Best Lawyers in America. He is a frequent lecturer and author on intellectual property topics, and is often quoted in the business and legal press. For a full list of his publications, presentations and representative matters, see the listing below.

    Chris is also a trusted business advisor and serves on advisory boards for several innovative technology-focused companies. He is married to his wife of 17 years, and is the father of two creative and talented daughters.

    Selected Results:*

    Chris has served as lead counsel in more than 100 patent cases. Many of these have settled on confidential terms. Additional specific results include:

    PCT International, Inc. v. Holland Electronics, LLC (D. Ariz. No. 12-cv-01797): Lead trial lawyer for telecommunications equipment supplier PCT in patent infringement case against competitor Holland Electronics, a division of Amphenol Corporation.  Following a four-week trial in the District of Arizona, the jury found that 60 separate Holland products infringed PCT’s patent and rejected Holland’s challenges to validity of the patent.  The District Court upheld the jury’s verdict and award of damages, and issued a permanent injunction prohibiting sales of Holland’s infringing products.  Also served as lead counsel on defending verdict and injunction on appeal.  Obtained summary affirmance by the Federal Circuit rejecting all of infringer’s claims on appeal.

    Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy v. Phillips Beverage Company: Trial counsel for defendant in $100 Million international arbitration proceeding brought by French multi-national seller of luxury goods arising from alleged breach of trademark license agreement; obtained a complete defense verdict and an award of fees from unanimous three member panel.

    Graco Minnesota, Inc. v. TTI, Inc.:  Lead counsel for patent holder case involving spray pump technology.  Case settled on confidential terms follow successful opposition to motion to transfer venue. 

    U.S. Water Services, Inc. v. Chem-Treat, Inc.:  Co-Counsel for defendant in patent infringement and trade secret dispute involving ethanol processing technologies. Obtained summary of non-infringement. 

    Nilfisk-Advance v. Tennant Corp.:  Lead counsel for claimant in false advertising dispute before the National Advertising Division (“NAD”). Arbitration panel issued order in favor of client finding that challenged advertising statements were unsubstantiated and should be discontinued. 

    U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. 1010 Metrodome Square, LLC: Lead trial counsel for claimant in an arbitration involving property valuation dispute; obtained panel award to client.

    Simmons, Inc. v. Bombardier Recreation Products:
    Represented patent holder in a patent infringement case brought by a small family-held business against world's largest manufacturer of motorized recreational products; case settled on confidential terms following Markman hearing and finding of infringement as a matter of law.  (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Transclean, Inc. v. Bridgewood Services, Inc.: Trial counsel for patent holder in a case involving claims of patent infringement and false advertising. The jury found in favor of client on all claims after a two week trial; later represented patent holder in defense of verdict on appeal before the Federal Circuit. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Lead counsel for trademark holder Best Buy in trademark infringement and dilution cases in courts throughout the United States enforcing rights in the BEST BUY and GEEK SQUAD marks, including:

    • Rescuecom Corporation, v. BBY Solutions, Inc., d/b/a Best Buy (N.D. New York 5:09-cv-1149 - Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr.)
    • BBY Solutions, Inc., et al. v. Tide, et al. (N.D. Fl. 1:10-cv-00101 - Judge Maurice M. Paul)
    • BBY Solutions, Inc. et al. v. Schwartz, et al.  (E.D. New York 11-cv-00947 - Judge E. Thomas Boyle)
    • BBY Solutions, Inc., et al. v. Karrie-Lee Karreman, et al. (D. Minn. 10-cv-4726 - Judge  Michael J. Davis)

    Liberty Bell Equipment Corp. v. Graco Minnesota, Inc.  Lead counsel for defendant in trademark infringement suit.  Case settled on confidential terms following defeat of trademark holder’s motion for summary judgment. 

    Great Clips, Inc. v. Hair Cuttery of Greater Boston, L.L.C. and Great Cuts, Inc.: Won summary judgment on behalf of trademark holder Great Clips, Inc. Result affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

    Phillips Products v. R.H. Phillips Vineyard, et al.: Represented defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement; case settled on confidential terms following hearing on motion for summary judgment. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Mulcahy v. Cheetah Learning LLC: Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving alleged infringement of copyrights in test preparation materials; case settled on confidential terms after the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of client and reversed grant of permanent injunction. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Amstel Music, et al. v. 800 Video, Inc.: Lead counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of alleged infringement of copyrights in musical works; plaintiff dismissed all claims against client during discovery phase with no payment by client. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Ag-Chem Equipment Co. v. Ceram Traz Corp.: Trial Counsel for plaintiff in a case involving claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation in which jury awarded verdict in excess of $1 million; later represented client in defense of verdict on appeal before the Minnesota Court of Appeals. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Harmon Glass Co. v. Hawkeye Auto Glass, Inc.: Trial counsel for defendant in which jury found in favor of client on claims involving price discrimination and misrepresentation. (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)

    Sole arbitrator in multi-million dollar dispute arising from software development and Oracle implementation program. Presided over week long arbitration hearing and numerous pre-hearing disputes under the American Arbitration Association’s Complex Commercial Rules.

    Sole arbitrator in multi-million dollar dispute relating to inventorship dispute.  Presided over week long arbitration hearing and numerous pre-hearing disputes under the American Arbitration Association’s Complex Commercial Rules.

    Past results are reported to provide the reader with an indication of the type of litigation in which we practice and do not and should not be construed to create an expectation of result in any other case as all cases are dependent upon their own unique fact situation and applicable law.

  • Recognition**

    Show All
    • Listed as a "Top Trademark Professional" in the 2019 edition of World Trademark Review 1000
    • Named a “Notable Practitioner in Intellectual Property Law,” Chambers USA (2018)
    • Named to the shortlist of “Outstanding US IP Litigators,” Managing Intellectual Property (2018)
    • Named to the “IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists” list, IAM (2017)
    • Named an “Intellectual Property Trailblazer,” National Law Journal (2016)
    • Named a “North Star Lawyer” by the Minnesota State Bar Association for providing at least 50 hours of pro bono legal services (2016)
    • Listed as a "Recommended Individual for Litigation and Licensing (Minnesota)," IAM 1000: The World's Leading Patent Practitioners (2014-2017)
    • Named a “Patent Star” and “Trademark Star,” Managing Intellectual Property (2016-2018)
    • Named an “IP Star,” Managing Intellectual Property (2013-2014)
    • Named one of "Minnesota's Best Lawyers," Best Lawyers in America and Minnesota Monthly (2013)
    • Named a "Litigation Star," Benchmark Litigation (2013 edition)
    • Listed in The Best Lawyers in America (2010-2019 editions)
    • Named one of Minnesota's "Top 40 Intellectual Property Attorneys" by Law & Politics (2007- 2009)
    • Named a "Minnesota Super Lawyer," Super Lawyers (2004, 2006-2018)

     
    **Being named to the list or receiving the award is not intended and should not be viewed as comparative to other lawyers or to create an expectation about results that might be achieved in a future matter.

  • Resources

    Show All

    Articles

    • Protecting Trade Secrets During Corporate Transactions
      Financier Worldwide (January 2019)
    • Minneapolis Sick and Safe Time Ordinance: What You Need to Know
      Robins Kaplan LLP (August 14, 2018)
    • Safeguarding Information Theft by Departing Employees
      Industry Today (April 2018)
    • Assessing Patent Strength Using Data-Driven Inputs: Characteristics Of Patents And Patent Owners That Drive Success In Inter Partes Review
      Les Nouvelles (March 2018)
    • Maximising Return on Investment in a Rapidly Transforming Environment
      IAM Yearbook (November 2017)
    • Patent Licensing and Assignment with an Eye Toward Enforcement: Tips for University Patent Owners
      Licensing Executives Society International (March 27, 2013)
    • How Direct Purchasers Fit into Walker Process Landscape
      Law360 (January 16, 2013)
    • Courtroom developments and their impact on patent monetisation
      2012 IP Monetisation (October 1, 2012)
    • The New Post-Issuance Procedures: The PTO's Final Rules on Discovery and Trial Practice
      Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (September 14, 2012)
    • Maximizing the Strength of Intellectual Property in Today's Marketplace
      The Licensing Journal, Vol. 32, No. 6 (July 1, 2012)
    • Using Consumer Surveys to Prove Patent Infringement Damages at Trial
      The Intellectual Property Strategist (December 1, 2011)
    • The Role of Consumer Surveys in Proving Patent Infringement Damages
      Bloomberg Law Reports (November 2, 2011)
    • IP: Arbitration of IP Licensing Agreements
      InsideCounsel (March 29, 2011)
    • IP: The Role of Consumer Surveys in Proving Patent Infringement Damages
      InsideCounsel (March 15, 2011)
    • IP: Lanham Act Clarifications
      InsideCounsel (March 1, 2011)
    • IP: Protecting Brands in Times of Transition
      Inside Counsel (February 15, 2011)
    • IP: The Demise of The 25 Percent Rule and Its Impact on Patent Damages
      InsideCounsel (February 1, 2011)

    News

    • Robins Kaplan Recognized in 2019 World Trademark Review 1000
    • Robins Kaplan Attorneys Recognized as 2018 Minnesota “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”
    • Robins Kaplan Receives High Ranks from Managing Intellectual Property Magazine; Seven Partners Named Patent Stars
    • Chambers USA Ranks Robins Kaplan LLP Extensively in 2018 Guide
    • Robins Kaplan LLP Announces National Practice Group Chairs
    • Christopher Larus Named to Shortlist of Outstanding US Intellectual Property Litigators
    • Robins Kaplan Attorneys Named to 2018 Best Lawyers in America List; Three Receive “Lawyer of the Year” Designation
    • Robins Kaplan Minnesota Attorneys Recognized as 2017 “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”
    • Christopher Larus Named to IAM Strategy 300 List of Leading IP Strategists
    • IAM Patent 1000 Recommends Robins Kaplan for Patent Litigation for Seventh Consecutive Year
    • Robins Kaplan Receives High Ranks from Managing Intellectual Property Magazine
    • Federal Circuit Upholds Jury Verdict in Favor of PCT International, Inc. in Patent Infringement Action Against Amphenol Subsidiary Holland Electronics
    • Robins Kaplan LLP Attorneys Named to 2017 Best Lawyers in America List, Two Named “Lawyers of the Year”
    • Robins Kaplan Minnesota Attorneys Recognized as 2016 “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”
    • National Law Journal Names Chris Larus Intellectual Property Trailblazer
    • IAM Patent 1000 Recommends Robins Kaplan for Patent Litigation
    • Robins Kaplan LLP Announces 2016 Executive Board
    • Settlement Vindicates Red Wing Collectors Society Foundation in Intellectual Property Dispute with Owners of Red Wing Stoneware and Pottery
    • PCT International, Inc. Obtains Permanent Injunction Against Amphenol Subsidiary Holland Electronics
    • Thirty-Eight Robins Kaplan Attorneys Recognized as Best Lawyers in America© 2016
    • Minnesota Attorneys Recognized as 2015 “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”
    • IAM Patent 1000 Ranks Firm High Nationally and in Minnesota
    • Jury Rules in Favor of PCT International, Inc. in Patent Infringement Action Against Amphenol Subsidiary Holland Electronics
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board Confirms Patent Challenge by PCT International
    • IAM Patent 1000 Recommends Firm for Patent Litigation
    • CIETAC Appoints Partner Christopher K. Larus To Panel Of Arbitrators
    • Firm's Partners Designated "IP Stars" by Managing Intellectual Property
    • Court Rules that the American Association for Justice did not Abandon Trademark Name in Rebranding Effort
    • American Association for Justice® Successfully Enforces Trademarks

    Speeches

    • Recent Changes to U.S. Patent Laws and their Impact on Patent Licensing
      Panelist, Licensing Executives Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (November 11, 2015)
    • The Use of Surveys in Patent Litigation
      Webinar, Certified Patent Valuation Analyst (April 14, 2015)
    • Leveraging Surveys in Patent Litigation; Demonstrating Consumer Perceptions, Avoiding Errors That Impact Damages
      Webinar, Strafford (July, 10 2014)
    • Protecting Trade Secrets in a Collaboration: 2014 Updates
      Webinar, Robins Kaplan LLP, Minneapolis, Minnesota (July 25, 2014)
    • Consumer Surveys in Patent Litigation
      Intellectual Property Owners Association, Webinar (June 12, 2014)
    • Academic Technology Transactions: Ensuring That License Negotiations in the Boardroom Maximize Patent Value in the Courtroom
      Association of University Technology Managers, San Francisco, California (February 21, 2014)
    • IP Series - Technology Transactions: Ensuring That License Negotiations in the Boardroom Maximize Patent Value in the Courtroom
      Webcast, MN IP Institute (December 9, 2013)
    • Strategic IP Monetization: Ensuring That Negotiations in the Boardroom Maximize Patent Value in the Courtroom
      CLE Presentation, Licensing Executives Society, Austin, Texas (November 22, 2013)
    • Ensuring That Negotiations in the Boardroom Maximize Patent Value in the Courtroom
      Licensing Executives Society, Minnesota Chapter, Minneapolis, Minnesota (June 18, 2013)
    • Trademark Litigation: A 2013 Update
      The Knowledge Congress, Webcast (March 5, 2013)
    • Hot Topics in District Court Litigation
      Association of Corporate Patent Counsel, Orlando, Florida (January 27-30, 2013)
    • Patent Litigation 2012
      The Knowledge Congress, Webcast (March 22, 2012)
    • The Use of Consumer Surveys in Patent Cases for Damages Apportionment
      Licensing Executives Society, Anaheim, California (March 13, 2012)
    • The Role of Consumer Surveys in Proving Patent Infringement Damages
      Minnesota CLE, Minneapolis, Minnesota (September 23, 2011)
    • Recent Developments in Intellectual Property Law for Civil Litigators
      Hennepin County Bar Association (December 13, 2010)
    • The Use of Arbitration Provisions in Licensing Agreements - One Size May Not Fit All
      LES Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (May 7, 2009)
    • Open Source Code: Recent Developments and Practical Implications
      2008 Midwest Computer Law Institute (October 24, 2008)
    • The Use of Arbitration Provisions in Licensing Agreements - One Size May Not Fit All
      Licensing Executives Society, Minneapolis, Minnesota (September 16, 2008)
    • Using Graphics Animation and Computer Generated Presentations to Teach Complex Patents to Judges and Juries
      Minnesota State Bar Association, Minnesota CLE Conference Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota (September 27-28, 2007)
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution in Intellectual Property Disputes
      Federal Bar Association, Minnesota Chapter, Minneapolis, Minnesota (March 29, 2007)
    • Medimmune v. Genetech: A Legal and Business Discussion About the Ruling and Business Implications of the Recent Supreme Court Ruling
      Licensing Executives Society, Minneapolis, Minnesota (March 13, 2007)
    • Intellectual Property Enforcement and Licensing-Understanding the Impact of Medimmune v. Genetech
      Minnesota CLE (February 2007)
    • Establishing Guidelines for Comparative Advertising Campaigns
      American Conference Institute, Achieving Commercial Success in the Face of Food Regulation & Litigation (September 2006)
    • The Arbitration of Licensing and Distributorship Disputes
      Association of University Technology Masters Annual Meeting (August 2006)
    • Open Source Code – Understanding and Managing the Risks
      Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association Annual Meeting (May 2006)
    • Developing and Assessing Comparative Advertising Campaigns
    • American Conferences Institute, Achieving Commercial Success in the Face of Food Regulation & Litigation (January 2006)
    • Practical Tips for Resolving Advertising Disputes
      Advertising Law in Minnesota (October 2005)
    • Conference on International Intellectual Property Law
      Chair, Center for International Legal Studies, Austria (March 2003)
    • Recovery of Monetary Remedies in Trade Secret Cases
      CLE Program (March 2002)
    • Monetary Remedies Under United States Trademark Law
      Cross-Border Intellectual Property Issues, Center for International Legal Studies (March 2002)

    Webinars

    • Best Patent Practices in a Transforming Environment Part 2
      In part two of this webinar series, Christopher Larus and Timothy Bianchi will discuss the rapidly evolving landscape for patent enforcement and licensing, and how innovative companies can adapt to this transformative environment.
      (March 29, 2017, 1:00 P.M. CST)
    • Best Patent Practices in a Transforming Environment Part 1
      In part one of this webinar series, Christopher Larus and Timothy Bianchi will discuss how to adapt your patent procurement practices to maximize value in the present enforcement environment and beyond.
      (February 22, 2017, 1:00 P.M. CST)
  • In the News

    Show All

    Quoted in:

    • The Minneapolis Star Tribune
    • The St. Paul Pioneer Press
    • Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal
    • Minnesota Business
    • ABA Journal
    • IP Law 360
  • Lawyers
  • Results
  • Firm
  • Industries
  • Services
  • Resources
  • Offices
  • Careers
  • Client Extranet
  • Site Map
  • Legal Notice
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
CONNECT WITH US
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • rss
Contact Us|800.553.9910
Submit
Any information that you send us in an e-mail message should not be confidential or otherwise privileged information. Sending us an e-mail message will not make you a client of Robins Kaplan LLP. We do not accept representation until we have had an opportunity to evaluate your matter, including but not limited to an ethical evaluation of whether we are in a conflict position to represent you. Accordingly, the information you provide to us in an e-mail should not be information for which you would have an expectation of confidentiality.

If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.

By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.

© Copyright 2019 Robins Kaplan LLP Law Firm All Rights Reserved. Attorney Advertising. Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome.