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
Bar & Court Admissions
- 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
- Barrister’s Club Litigation Section
Executive Committee, 2010-2012
- Federal Bar Association, Northern District of California Chapter
- Association of Business Trial Lawyers
- Defending innovative technology companies against patent infringement claims, including those brought by non-practicing entities, while leveraging all available defense strategies including venue challenges.
- Defending clients accused of violating trade secrets laws by hiring competitors’ employees against both state and federal trade secrets claims, including cutting-edge work regarding the scope of the Defend Trade Secrets Act.
- Employing command of pre-answer procedures to defeat lawsuits filed in excess of federal court jurisdiction, in state court despite it being an inconvenient forum, under preclusion principles such as res judicata and judicial estoppel, or simply for failing to state a claim.
- Leveraging discovery and inconsistent contract language to both defeat significant fraud claim and secure a sizable recovery on counter-claims.
- Securing TRO and obtaining court order for immediate deposition of departing employee less than a week after client uncovered potential misappropriation of trade secrets.
- Persuading a court to adopt aggressive (and unachievable) procedural requirements for Plaintiffs that reduced client’s exposure by a factor of ten.
- Vacating an adverse jury verdict on appeal by identifying both instructional errors and incorrect evidentiary rulings.
- Implementing a discovery plan in a document-intensive multi-party case that avoided unnecessary costs, protected client’s interests, and maintained client’s reputation with the court.
- 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)
- 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)
- Boilermakers Nat. Annuity Trust Fund v. WaMu Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series AR1, 748 F. Supp. 2d 1246, 1250 (W.D. Wash. 2010) (briefing and strategy for motion to dismiss, reducing company exposure by well more than half)
- 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)
Frank Busch in Kerr & Wagstaffe Firm News