Intelligent Justice

Contact

Our Founder

RICHARD L. GROSSMAN

The founder of Intelligent Justice is an experienced trial lawyer whose work over the past 40 years has concentrated primarily in the area of complex business litigation — and now alternative dispute resolution. His practice has included legal disputes covering a broad range of issues, including unfair competition, business fraud, antitrust, contract disputes, trade secret litigation, licensing disputes, class action litigation, real estate and construction disputes, computer performance, employment and intellectual property litigation. Mr. Grossman has appeared before federal and state courts at both the trial and appellate court levels. He was the chairman of his prior law firm’s litigation practice.

Concern over the extraordinary cost, delay and inefficiency of obtaining justice in the public court system motivated Mr. Grossman to seek better dispute resolution alternatives and ultimately led to the creation of Intelligent Justice. He has broad experience in arbitration and mediation procedures but he is especially passionate about the virtues of Intelligent Justice’s comprehensive adjudication which provides the most cost efficient path to a fully analyzed, thoughtful and just resolution of a legal dispute.

PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION

2022 California Lawyer, Attorney of the Year

2022 Super Lawyers, 10 years

American Antitrust Institute 2022 Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement Award

2022 America’s Top 100 Bet-the-Company Litigators

2022 Elite Lawyer

REPRESENTATIVE CASES

Antitrust Litigation

UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health – Lead Counsel in a ground-breaking, antitrust class action battle against Sutter Health, the dominant hospital chain in Northern California, on behalf of a certified class of employers and other self-funded payers who were overcharged for healthcare services provided to their employees as a result of Sutter’s anticompetitive contracting practices. The litigation was joined several years after it was filed by California’s Attorney General who asserted parallel claims on behalf of the People of California and then worked closely with Class Counsel to prepare for trial.

  • Result: $575 million settlement for the overcharges imposed upon the class plus at least ten years of comprehensive injunctive relief to prevent future anticompetitive behavior.

Antitrust Litigation Against Microsoft — Multiple cases on behalf of Microsoft’s software licensees and a separate case on behalf of a competitor for unlawful restraint of trade and unfair competition in the operating system and key business software markets.

  • Microsoft Cases 1-V:  Co-Lead counsel in an antitrust class action on behalf of Microsoft’s business and consumer licensees in California.
    • Result: $1.1 billion settlement.
  • San Francisco v. Microsoft:  Co-Lead counsel in an antitrust class action on behalf of Microsoft’s government entity licensees in California.
    • Result: $70 million settlement.
  • Gordon v. Microsoft:  Co-counsel in an antitrust class action on behalf of Microsoft’s business and consumer licensees in Minnesota.
  • Result: $182 million settlement after 6 weeks of trial.
  • Sun Microsystems v. Microsoft:  Co-counsel assisting in antitrust claim on behalf of Sun Microsystems.
  • Result: $700 million settlement.

Cytec Antitrust Litigation — Represented a subsidiary of Cytec Industries in antitrust litigation against its principal carbon fiber suppliers for price fixing and illegal allocation of customers.

  • Result: Multiple settlements for a total recovery by client in excess of $16 million.

Mills v. Cor-O-Van Records Management, Inc. — Defended Cor-O-Van against antitrust class action claim.

  • Result: Persuaded plaintiff to dismiss its unfounded claims against client without further proceedings or payment of any kind.

Chinese Hospital v. California Pacific Medical Group — Represented Chinese Hospital in antitrust and unfair competition claims arising out of exclusionary practices in the San Francisco health care market that threatened the future economic viability of the hospital, its medical group and its health plan — and hindered their ability to serve the surrounding ethnic community.

  • Result: Settlement forbidding exclusionary practices and providing client with all requested relief.

Visa USA Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Cases — Co-counsel for Visa in defense of consumer class action cases in numerous states alleging anti-competitive practices in the credit card and debit card markets.

  • Result: Nearly all indirect purchases antitrust claims resolved in favor of Visa through court dismissal or summary judgment. Remaining cases resolved through settlement.

Intergraph Corp v. Intel Corp. — Co-counsel for Intergraph in prosecuting antitrust, patent, contract and tort claims against Intel.

  • Result: $450 million settlement for client

St. Luke’s Hospital v. Cal. Pacific Medical Ctr. and Sutter Health — Represented St. Luke’s Hospital in an antitrust claim arising out of exclusionary agreements that unreasonably restrained trade and threatened the client’s future economic viability.

  • Result: Settlement that required financial assistance and a future affiliation to preserve the client as the primary source of hospital services for the surrounding community and its disadvantaged residents.

Datasafe Publications, Inc. v. Galacticomm Technologies, Inc. — Defended Galacticomm against antitrust claims for alleged resale price maintenance and price discrimination.

• Result: Swift confidential settlement favorable to client

Complex Business Litigation

LMP Corporation v. Universal Mfg. Corporation — Represented plaintiffs in seven-month jury trial concerning Universal’s fraudulent promise to use its best efforts to commercially develop and promote clients’ patented energy-saving lighting technology.

  • Result: $96 million verdict in favor of clients; affirmed on appeal.

Chevron USA, Inc. v. Digital Equipment Corporation — Represented Chevron in $32 million claim in connection with the failure of an extensive computer systems integration project.

  • Result: Favorable confidential settlement recovery for client.

Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Oracle Corporation — Defended Oracle against $30 million claim asserting that its software was responsible for a failed computer systems project.

  • Result: Warranty, fraud and misrepresentation claims against client were dismissed through motions to the court. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all remaining claims against client.

Bushnell v. Visual Information Service Corp. — Defended client in a $30 million claim arising out of an alleged contractual arrangement with its ex-CEO for a 33 percent interest in the stock of the company.

  • Result: Summary judgment in favor of the client.

Union Trust Bank v. Tele Video Systems, Inc. — Defended TeleVideo against multi-million dollar claim concerning a failed Navy acquisition of 36,000 computers.

  • Result: Summary judgment in favor of client.

Palinkas v. Adjusters Auto Rental, Inc. — Trial of claim for unjust termination of employment.

  • Result: Directed verdict in favor of employer client during trial.

BioContacts v. Coopervision — License dispute concerning patented contact lens technology developed by R&D client and licensed to the defendant. Conflict of interest counterclaim against  individual client who served on the boards of directors of both parties.

  • Result: Summary judgment in favor of individual client on conflict of interest counterclaim. Corporate client’s affirmative claim against licensee settled favorably during trial.

Trade Secret Litigation

Zeny Computer Systems v. Acer Inc. — Defended Acer in trial of $15.1 million claim for alleged misappropriation of trade secrets in design of computer motherboards.

  • Result: Directed verdict in favor of client on all claims at trial; affirmed on appeal.

Glentech Inc. v. Berkeley Antibody Company, Inc. —  Represented Glentech in claim against competitor and ex-employee for misappropriation of Glentech’s trade secrets surrounding its development and production of monoclonal antibodies.

  • Result: Settlement authorizing court-ordered permanent injunction protecting client from the adverse effects of the defendants’ theft of its trade secrets.

Prithvi Solutions Trade Secret Litigation — Defended Prithvi Solutions against claims for alleged misappropriation of telephone network software trade secrets and unfair competition.

  • Result: Claims against client dismissed after payment of token settlement amount.

Trademark and Copyright Litigation

Gracie V. Gracie — Defended corporate and individual clients in jury trial of trademark and associated unfair competition claims and represented them in pursuing their trademark counterclaims.

  • Result: Defense verdict in favor of clients on all claims and verdict in favor of clients on one of their trademark counterclaims.

Bonny Products, Inc. v. G&S Metals, Inc. — Defended G&S Metals in International Trade Commission trial of trademark infringement claim concerning the importation of kitchen utensils.

  • Result: Verdict in favor of client.

Chung Kai Industries Copyright Litigation — Represented Chung Kai Industries in multiple lawsuits against a variety of large chain retailers (e.g. Target, Kmart, Baby Superstore) for infringement of client’s numerous copyrighted fabric print designs for children’s clothing.

  • Result: All lawsuits resolved through settlements providing for payment of lost profits to client and cessation of further copyright infringement.

SIGNIFICANT APPELLATE WORK

Yousuf v. Samantar –– Amicus Brief in the United States Supreme Court for the Foreign Minister of Somaliland on behalf of the victims of torture performed in neighboring Somalia at the direction of the former Somali Defense Minister (now residing in the U.S.) and supporting torture victims’ appeal of the lower court’s dismissal of their damage claims.

  • Result: Dismissal of torture victims’ damage claims reversed on appeal.

UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health  — Opposed appeal seeking to reverse trial court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration of antitrust claim that client never agreed to arbitrate.

  • Result: Trial Court’s denial of motion to compel client to arbitrate its claims upheld on appeal

Cytec Engineered Materials, Inc. v. Hercules Inc. — Appeal in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, seeking to reverse trial court’s improper dismissal of antitrust claim for price fixing and illegal allocation of customers.

  • Result: Dismissal of client’s antitrust claims reversed on appeal.

LMP Corporation v. Universal Mfg. Corporation — Opposed appeal of $96 million trial verdict in the California Court of Appeal and subsequently in the California Supreme Court.

  • Result: Judgment in favor of client affirmed “without reservation”.

Halicki v. United Artists Communications — Opposed appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, of the summary judgment granted in favor of client on Lanham Act unfair competition claim.

  • Result: Judgment affirmed in an appellate decision establishing that the Lanham Act’s unfair competition provisions only regulate practices between actual competitors.

Microsoft Cases I-V— Opposed appeal of $1.1 billion settlement by class member objector.

  • Result: Fairness of settlement upheld on appeal.

Marietta Coal Co. v. Lindley — Opposed appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court of an Ohio Board of Tax Appeals decision denying a personal property tax exemption for pollution control equipment at a multi-million dollar coal processing facility.

  • Result: Adverse decision reversed and tax exemption granted to client.

SIGNIFICANT ARBITRATIONS

ESI Corp. v. Lucero Corp. — Complex real estate and commercial leasing dispute adjudicated by panel of three arbitrators selected through the American Arbitration Association.

  • Result: Arbitration decision in favor of client.

E.B. Katz Co. v. Heather Hill Nursing Home — Construction contract dispute adjudicated by panel of three arbitrators selected through the American Arbitration Association.

  • Result: Arbitration award to contractor client.

PUBLICATIONS & PRESENTATIONS

Litigators Become Adjudicators: The Formation of an Attorney Network to Provide Better Dispute Resolution at Half the Cost, Just Resolutions publication of the American Bar Assn. Section on Dispute Resolution, March 2012

Reinventing Justice Through Comprehensive Adjudication, Inside the Minds: Alternative Dispute Resolution Client Strategies, Aspatore Books, 2007

Text Box: Civil Antitrust Litigation in the United States, presentation at National Chengchi University College of Commerce symposium on Navigating Antitrust in the U.S. and Taiwan, October 2011Reaching the Jury in the High Technology Case, The Colorado Lawyer, November 1996

Pitching the High-Tech Case to Humans, Intellectual Property Magazine, The Recorder, 1995

Part-Time Workers Pose Risk to Trade Secrets, Intellectual Property, San Francisco Daily Journal, March 1994

Antitrust Litigation Reform: A Modest Proposal, Antitrust publication of the American Bar Assn. Antitrust Section, Summer 1993

Trade Secrets: Cost-Effective Protection for Valuable Business Information, presentations to the San Francisco, Denver, Seattle, San Diego and Palo Alto chapters of the Association of Corporate Counsel, 2009-2010

The Convergence of Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property Law, presentation to San Diego Intellectual Property Law Association, November 2004

BAR AND COURT ADMISSIONS

United States Supreme Court                                                      

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States District Court, Northern District of California

United States District Court, Central District of California

United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio

California State Courts

Ohio State Courts

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

Pillsbury & Coleman, LLP                                         San Francisco, CA                   2013 – Present

Kilpatrick, Townsend & Stockton, LLP                     San Francisco, CA                   2011 –  2013

            Townsend and Townsend and Crew, LLP     San Francisco, CA                   1993 – 2010

            Khourie, Crew & Jaeger, LLP                        San Francisco, CA                   1986 – 1992

Farella, Braun + Martel, LLP                                     San Francisco, CA                   1984 – 1986

Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff, LLP          Cleveland, OH                                    1979 –  1984

EDUCATION

J.D. 1979       Duke University School of Law, Durham, N.C. Editor-in-Chief, Duke Legal Research Program

B.S. 1976 Northwestern University, Evanston, IL Journalism