Kent R. Raygor

Attorney in Los Angeles, CA

Kent Raygor, a partner in the Century City office, practices in the Business Trial, Intellectual Property, and Entertainment, Technology and Advertising groups.

Areas of Practice

Complex business litigation: Handles complex litigation, including class actions and multidistrict litigation, appearing before state and federal trial courts around the country, including the California Courts of Appeal and Supreme Court, Multidistrict Litigation Panel, Ninth Circuit and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and U.S. Supreme Court.

· Business litigation: Numerous consumer class actions, including cases for Gillette, Pier 1, and MillerCoors; complex, high-tech patent litigation for Honeywell, Northrop Grumman, and others; cases with significant constitutional issues arising under the First Amendment, the Reserved Powers Doctrine, the Contracts Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and Privacy provisions; multidistrict litigation (MDL) defending clients against numerous copyright, unfair competition, and consumer class action lawsuits consolidated before a single court.

· Media law litigation and counseling: Emphasis on First Amendment, privacy, defamation, and right of publicity litigation; pre-publication clearance analyses for films, documentaries, screenplays, advertising, books, and news; complex matters for many Fortune 500 companies, including Fox, Disney, ABC, ESPN, Lions Gate, CNET, and Sony Pictures; numerous right of publicity and invasion of privacy cases defending clients against claims by celebrities, including Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Dianne Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Cameron Diaz, Audioslave, Weezer, Bruce Willis, Denzel Washington, Kate Hudson, Zooey Deschanel, and Sandra Bullock.

· Intellectual property litigation and counseling: Numerous trademark, copyright, trade dress, trade secret, false advertising, patent, computer, and Internet litigation and counseling matters for UGG, Eddie Bauer, MillerCoors, Sprint, MGA Entertainment, Digital Domain, CompUSA, TigerDirect, Hurley, Billabong, Samsung, and many others.

Honors

· Named a "Litigation Star" (Benchmark Litigation, 2009)

· Recognized by "Film, Music, Theater & Television - Advice to Corporates" (Legal 500, 2009)

· Recognized as one of the "Top 10 Entertainment IP Lawyers" in California (Los Angeles Daily Journal, April 2008)

· Named a Southern California Super Lawyer, Intellectual Property Litigation (Los Angeles Magazine, 2006-2013)

· Recognized for digital rights management and digital convergence expertise (Los Angeles Business Journal, "Who's Who In Law-Intellectual Property" issue, 2006)

· Judge Pro Tem, Los Angeles Superior Courts (1996-2002)

· Board of Directors, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) (2006-2013)

Experience

REPRESENTATIVE LITIGATION EXPERIENCE

Complex And Multidistrict Litigation

Litton Systems v. Honeywell
Defended Honeywell for over 11 years in this extremely complex patent dispute, resulting in a 3-month patent infringement jury trial-the largest patent case in U.S. history at the time. The technology involved thin film physics, laser optics, and materials science. Following the trial, the Court declared Litton's patent invalid and overturned a $1.2 billion jury verdict, thus enabling Honeywell to continue its inertial navigation systems business. Following remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the court granted summary judgment in Honeywell's favor on all remaining claims. The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment in Honeywell's favor that no patent infringement had occurred, effectively ending the patent case after 11 years. Reported at Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 729 (C.D. Cal. 1995); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 87 F.3d 1559 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 30316 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 118 F.3d 747 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Honeywell, Inc. v. Litton Systems, Inc., 520 U.S. 1111 (1997); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 140 F.3d 1449 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 145 F.3d 1472 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 238 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Gillette M3Power Advertising Class Actions
Defended Gillette in seven class actions before several U.S. District Courts. The plaintiffs in each case asserted false advertising claims arising out of performance assertions in advertising for Gillette's M3Power razor. Those cases, along with 23 similar class actions filed around the country, were eventually transferred to the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts for consolidated multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings. Reported at In re M3Power Razor System Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation, 2007 WL 128846 (D. Mass. 2007).

In re The Gator Corporation Software Trademark & Copyright Litigation
Defended Gator (ska Claria) in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) action in Atlanta, involving permission-based pop-up Internet advertising delivered to subscribers targeted at interests exhibited through their web-surfing behaviors. The plaintiffs (UPS, Wells Fargo, Hertz, L.L. Bean, TigerDirect, Holiday Inn Hotels, Overstock.com, LendingTree, PriceGrabber, and others) argued that the delivery of pop-up ads to consumers' home computer monitors, even when those consumers agreed to receive such ads, infringed the plaintiffs' trademarks and copyrights and constituted unfair competition. Reported at The Hertz Corporation v. The Gator Corporation, 250 F. Supp. 2d 421 (D.N.J. 2003); In re The Gator Corporation Software Trademark & Copyright Litigation, 259 F. Supp. 2d 1378 (J.P.M.L. 2003).

University of Southern California, University Gateway Development, Urban Partners v. Conquest Student Housing
Defended Conquest Student Housing in ten lawsuits with USC, developer Urban Partners, financier Blackstone Group, and Los Angeles property owners. USC and Urban asserted through RICO, antitrust, and tort claims that Conquest, by filing objections with the City and the courts to a planned development USC wanted to build across the street from the University, was unlawfully interfering with their business. Conquest filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike directed at USC's attempt to try to bar Conquest and the public from exercising their First Amendment right to petition the City, the courts, and the public about development projects that arguably violate environmental, health and safety, zoning, or other restrictions.

Starz Entertainment v. Buena Vista Television
Defended Buena Vista Television (Walt Disney Company) in a breach of contract action arising out of its electronic sell-through of Disney films through Apple's iTunes service. Starz asserted such sales breached its decades-long license agreement with Buena Vista, which gave Starz the right to exhibit Disney films through Starz' subscription-based pay television services. The case settled just before trial was to commence

Ultimate Fighting Championship v. Dream Stage Entertainment (Pride FC)
Represented Dream Stage, a Japanese company staging mixed martial arts bouts in international arenas. Negotiated pay-per-view agreements, worked with the California Athletic Commission to get new MMA rules enacted in California, and represented Dream Stage in disputes with UFC.

Fresno Madera Farm Credit v. Open Solutions
Represented FMFC, an agricultural credit association regulated by the Farm Credit Administration, in breach of contract, fraud, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment claims against a software systems developer that provides data processing services to financial service providers.

Boyle v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Digital Domain
Defended Twentieth Century Fox and Digital Domain, an Academy Award®-winning special effects house, in a patent infringement suit involving the special effects in the 1997 film, Titanic.

Northrop Grumman v. Siemens Audiologische Technik, Siemens Hearing Instruments, GN Resound, Oticon, Phonak, Widex Hearing Aid, et al.
Represented Northrop Grumman in a multi-party patent infringement action against the leading hearing aid manufacturers.

Tavarua Island Resort, Fiji
Represented Tavarua Island Resort, the world's top surf destination, in dealings with the Fijian government concerning access to the famous "Cloudbreak" reef, and in a dispute with a shareholder for misappropriation of company assets and breach of his duty of loyalty to the company.

Michelle Pfeiffer, Sandra Bullock, Cameron Diaz, Diane Keaton, Mandy Moore, Kate Hudson v. Systemax, TigerDirect, CompUSA, Hewlett-Packard, Westinghouse Digital, Lenovo, Acer, Gateway, Logitech, et al.
Represented the defendants against right of publicity claims asserted by Michelle Pfeiffer, Sandra Bullock, Cameron Diaz, Diane Keaton, Mandy Moore, and Kate Hudson arising from the use of movie stills owned by various film studios, showing characters these actors had played in various films, to advertise the sale of home entertainment products.

Constitutional Law

(Private Developer) v. Community Redevelopment Agency
Represented a developer against a Redevelopment agency concerning a conflict between the Reserved Powers Doctrine and the Contracts Clause. The tension between those provisions created a problem when, after creating vested rights through an enforceable development agreement, a municipality enacted ordinances rendering the development unlawful.

CLP Investment v. United States of America; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Represented a developer in an Equal Protection violation action against the U.S. and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concerning bad-faith and discriminatory conduct in connection with repeated and pretextual refusals to confirm that a residential project proposed by the developer complied with flowage easements and related rights in favor of the U.S.

Brad Pitt v. Playgirl
Defended a magazine in a First Amendment and Right To Privacy case following its republication of nude photographs of Brad Pitt and Gwyneth Paltrow taken by a paparazzo while they were on vacation, which others had previously published in European tabloids.

José Solano v. Playgirl
First Amendment and Right To Privacy. A former Baywatch actor sued because client Playgirl had used his headshot in an article (which included no nudity) about ten male actors in Hollywood and used his publicity still on the cover. The actor argued he suffered a privacy invasion because the magazine's content placed him in a false light. The Court granted judgment in favor of the magazine and ordered the actor to pay its attorneys' fees. That decision, however, was then reversed and remanded in Solano v. Playgirl, 292 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 2002), after which the case settled.

Jennifer Aniston v. Man's World Publications
Defended magazines in a First Amendment, Right To Privacy, and right of publicity case filed by Jennifer Aniston over the publication of a topless photograph, ending in a settlement on the first day of a jury trial.

People v. Martin Scorcese, Universal/MCA Pictures, Cineplex Odeon
Represented Martin Scorcese, Universal/MCA, and Cineplex Odeon in First Amendment cases, successfully blocking attempted censorship of the 1988 film The Last Temptation of Christ under blasphemy, picketing, obscenity, and other laws.

Microsoft Corporation v. CNET News.com
Defended CNET in a First Amendment and Journalist's Privilege dispute over Microsoft's attempt to discover the identity of confidential sources who obtained Bill Gates' e-mail files.

University of Southern California, University Gateway Development, Urban Partners v. Conquest Student Housing
(above)

Copyright

Luvdarts v. AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Spectrum, T-Mobile
Defended Sprint in a suit by Luvdarts, which creates and distributes audiovisual greeting cards. Luvdarts asserted that the wireless carrier industry committed vicarious and contributory copyright infringement by providing the means for peer-to-peer delivery of MMS content, thereby infringing MMS providers' copyrights in that content. It argued that the carriers had a duty and the ability to supervise infringement over their networks, failed to implement a digital rights management system to prevent infringement, and induced, caused, or contributed to infringement by consumers using those networks. Sprint and the other carriers successfully moved to dismiss. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. It revisited the Supreme Court's decisions in Sony and Grokster and updated its own decisions in Napster, Perfect 10, and Heredia on the viability of vicarious and contributory infringement claims where an entire industry creates a system or network for useful purposes, which then is used by some for infringement. Reported at Luvdarts LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC; et al., 2011 WL 997199, 98 U.S.P.Q.2d 1277 (C.D. Cal. 2011), affirmed, Luvdarts, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC; et al., 710 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. Mar. 25, 2013).

Mondane v. Screen Gems, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Rainforest Films Streat v. Rainforest Films, Sony Pictures Entertainment
Defended Screen Gems, Sony, and Rainforest in two copyright infringement and idea submission cases, one over the 2007 film, Stomp The Yard, and the other over the 2005 film, The Gospel. The plaintiffs, faced with the defendants' summary judgment motions, dismissed their suits.

McEvilley v. TigerDirect, CompUSA
Defended TigerDirect and CompUSA against claims of copyright infringement by a composer of theme music for the TigerTV consumer electronics series.

Classic Concepts v. Pier 1 Imports
Defended Pier 1 Imports in copyright infringement suits over the design of kilims and other home decorating products sold by Pier 1.

iKindi v. STW Fixed Income Management
Represented STW in copyright and breach of contract claims against a software systems engineering company that developed software and database management tools for STW.

Trademark

Hasbro, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment
Defended MGA (creator of the Bratz® dolls). Hasbro claimed MGA's Spider-Man & Friends 3-D Memory Match-Up game infringed Hasbro's rights in a card-matching game it had marketed as "Memory" since 1966. After a 7-day trial, the Court ruled in favor of MGA, finding it had shown (through third-party memory games, dictionaries, encyclopedias, trade publications, testimony from linguists and game experts, federally issued patents and trademark records, Hasbro's own use of "memory" with other products in a generic sense, and other evidence) that, despite Hasbro's 40 years marketing the game, claimed $130,000,000 in sales, and an incontestable trademark registration, the term "memory" was generic for this type of game and could not function as a trademark. Reported at Hasbro, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, 497 F. Supp. 2d 337 (D.R.I. 2007).

Research In Motion (BlackBerry) v. Samsung
Defended Samsung against trademark infringement claims asserted by RIM, which claimed that Samsung's "BlackJack" and "Black Carbon" smartphones infringed RIM's trademark rights in the term "BlackBerry".

Griffith Suisse Luxury Group v. eBay, Inc.; Gianni Versace, S.p.A.
After 41/2 years of litigation and six amended complaints, the Court granted judgment in favor of client Versace. Versace discovered counterfeit product on eBay traced to Griffith Suisse, a seller operating under aliases out of the Philippines and Australia. Versace and other brand owners notified eBay, which then barred Griffith from eBay. Griffith, claiming Versace's actions had cost it $14 million in sales and destruction of its business, sued for defamation, restraint of trade, and interference. After evidence of counterfeiting was discovered, Griffith agreed to never again sell Versace-branded products or use its name or marks anywhere in the world, entry of an injunction, and jurisdiction anywhere to enforce the injunction. After Griffith reneged, Versace had to seek summary judgment in order to enforce the unsigned agreement, which the Court granted.

Al Capp Enterprises v. The Walt Disney Company, ABC
Defended Disney and ABC in a trademark suit filed by the owner of rights to the L'il Abner comic strip and characters, over references in the 2001-2004 Lizzie McGuire television series to a "Sadie Hawkins Day" and "Sadie Hawkins Dance." Obtained a dismissal of the entire action.

UGG Holdings, Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Koolaburra
Represented UGG and Deckers, manufacturers and sellers of the famous UGG® boots, against a manufacturer of sheepskin boots who was unlawfully using the mark. The defendant argued that the term "ugg" was generic for such footwear in Australia and that the doctrine of foreign equivalents thereby mandated invalidation of UGG's trademark rights in the U.S. Obtained summary judgment for UGG and Deckers, thereby defeating a genericness attack on the famous UGG® trademark. Reported at UGG Holdings, Inc. v. Severn, et al., 2004 WL 5458426 (C.D. Cal. 2004); UGG Holdings, Inc. v. Severn, et al., 2005 WL 5887187 (C.D. Cal. 2005).

Fuel Design v. Fox Extreme Sports Network
Fuel Clothing Company v. Fuel TV
Defended Fox Cable in two trademark suits filed by companies using the name "Fuel" (one a broadcast design company and the other an action sports clothing company), who complained about Fox's new 24/7 action sports network, Fuel TV. One case ended in a settlement after a failed attempt to obtain a TRO enjoining the launch of the network; the other in a settlement just before trial was to commence.

AKA Clothing, Inc. v. Eddie Bauer
Defended Eddie Bauer in a trademark case filed by a clothing manufacturer who objected to a new line of Eddie Bauer clothing marketed under an "AKA" name. Eddie Bauer prevailed and launched a national chain of AKA EDDIE BAUER stores.

In re The Gator Corporation Software Trademark & Copyright Litigation
(above)

Right Of Publicity

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Denzel Washington v. Fry's Electronics
Defended Fry's, a consumer electronics retailer, in a right of publicity suit filed by Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, and Denzel Washington, who claimed that the use of movie stills showing characters from the films Collateral Damage (Schwarzenegger), Hart's War (Willis), and John Q (Washington) in depictions of televisions in newspaper ads promoting the sale of DVDs of the actors' films, infringed the actors' rights.

Arnold Schwarzenegger v. Best Buy, Lions Gate Entertainment
Defended Lions Gate in a right of publicity claim filed by Arnold Schwarzenegger. Best Buy advertised the sale of the Terminator 2 DVD, released by Lions Gate. Best Buy used a movie still from the film in depictions of television monitors in advertisements.

Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston v. Casa Damiani
Defended Damiani, an Italian jewelry house, against right of publicity claims by Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston over their wedding jewelry, which Pitt claimed to have designed and Damiani produced.

Chris Cornell, et al. ["Audioslave"] v. Miller Brewing Company, Young & Rubicam
Rivers Cuomo, et al. ["Weezer"] v. Miller Brewing Company, Young & Rubicam

Defended Miller Brewing in right of publicity and false endorsement suits filed by the bands Audioslave and Weezer over an advertisement in Rolling Stone magazine celebrating 50 years of rock history. The ad's background consisted of a collage of many ticket stubs for rock shows covering a 32-year time span, of which two were for Audioslave and Weezer shows.

Catherine Zeta-Jones v. Caudalíe, Neiman Marcus, Turnberry Estates
Defended Caudalíe, a French cosmetics company, in a right of publicity and false designation of origin suit filed by Catherine Zeta-Jones arising from Caudalíe's reference in marketing materials to reports Zeta-Jones had purchased and used Caudalíe products.

Noah Johnson v. Hurley International
Defended Hurley, the designer and wholesaler of HURLEY® brand clothing, against right of publicity, breach of contract, and false endorsement claims asserted by one of Hurley's sponsored professional surfers. Prevailed after a full trial. Reported at Johnson v. Hurley International, 77 Fed. Appx. 412, (9th Cir. 2003).

Zooey Deschanel v. Kohl's Department Stores
Defended Kohl's against right of publicity claims asserted by actress Zooey Deschanel concerning a line of shoes created by Steve Madden Stores for Kohl's called the "Zooey" style shoe.

Brad Pitt v. Playgirl
(above)

José Solano v. Playgirl
(above)

Jennifer Anniston v. Man's World Publications
(above)

Michelle Pfeiffer, Sandra Bullock, Cameron Diaz, Diane Keaton, Mandy Moore, Kate Hudson v. Systemax, TigerDirect, CompUSA, Hewlett-Packard, Westinghouse Digital, Lenovo, Acer, Gateway, Logitech, et al.
(above)

Trade Secret

Quarterdeck Office Systems v. Wollongong
Represented Quarterdeck against former employees who misappropriated software code for an Internet browser. Conducted a search and seizure of the purloined software in conjunction with law enforcement agencies who raided the offices of the competitor to whom the former employees had brought the stolen software.

Litton Systems v. Sundstrand
Defended Sundstrand against trade secret misappropriation claims involving ring laser gyroscope-based inertial navigation systems for aircraft.

McDonnell Douglas v. Northrop
Defended Northrop against trade secret misappropriation claims involving misappropriation of technology used for the avionics and graphic user interfaces for the F-18 fighter aircraft.

Sysco Food Services
Harbor Truck Bodies
Represented Sysco and Harbor in separate actions involving managers and executives who left with company trade secrets and moved to their chief competitors.

Patent

Water Fun Products v. Proslide Technology
Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of defendant Proslide. The plaintiff asserted patent infringement over a particular design for a funnel-like water slide commonly found at water amusement parks. Reported at Water Fun Products Corp. v. Proslide Technology, Inc., 2005 WL 6219200 (C.D. Cal. 2005); Water Fun Products Corp. v. Proslide Technology, Inc., 2006 WL 5720347 (C.D. Cal. 2006)

Litton Systems v. Honeywell
(above)

Boyle v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Digital Domain
(above)

Northrop Grumman v. Siemens Audiologische Technik, Siemens Hearing Instruments, GN Resound, Oticon, Phonak, Widex Hearing Aid, et al.
(above)

Other Media, Entertainment Cases

Flying Mallard Productions, Scott Gurney, Deirdre Delaney v. ESPN
Defended ESPN in a trademark, idea submission, and right of publicity suit filed by two actors over ESPN's prime-time reality series, Totally Hooked, which the plaintiffs alleged appropriated their ideas and format for a series, Fish On!, earlier aired by ESPN. ESPN defeated an injunction aimed at barring the airing of the series and the case settled.

Abraham v. Lancaster Community Hospital
Represented a hospital director in a landmark defamation and judicial proceedings privilege case. Abraham v. Lancaster Community Hospital, 217 Cal. App. 3d 796 (1990).

Randazzo v. Midori Entertainment, Longneedle Entertainment
Defended Midori and Longneedle against copyright, contract, and other claims brought by a former producer of the Animal Atlas television series against the production companies employing him.

KDN Sports, Don Nomura
Represented KDN Sports and its well-known sports agent Don Nomura in connection with antitrust, defamation, and RICO claims arising out of contracts with Dominican and Japanese baseball players (Hideo Nomo, Robinson Checo, Alfonso Soriano, and others) and attempts by the U.S. Commissioner of Baseball to keep them from playing in the U.S.

(Playboy Playmate) v. (Manager)
Represented a Playboy Playmate in a dispute with her music and business manager and her efforts to terminate that relationship.

(Reality Television Star) v. (Agent/Manager)
Represented a reality television star in a dispute with persons posing as her talent agents and business managers and purporting to act on her behalf, without her authorization.

Steinberg Moorad & Dunn, Inc. v. David Dunn, Athletes First, et al.
Defended agent and manager defendants against RICO, breach of contract, and trade secret claims filed by Leigh Steinberg's sports agency against employees who left the agency to set up a competing agency. Prevailed with the court granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the trade secret claim. Reported at Steinberg Moorad & Dunn, Inc. v. Dunn, et al., 2002 WL 31968234 (C.D. Cal. 2002); Steinberg Moorad & Dunn, Inc. v. Dunn, et al., 136 Fed. Appx. 6 (9th Cir. 2005).

Counseling

Advertising Advice
Counseled Fox Sports, Fuel TV, Fox Mobile Entertainment, Chrysler, MillerCoors, Gillette, ESPN, Herbalife, 3 Day Blinds, FrameStore, USBank, Cisco, advertising agencies, and many others in connection with proposed or already published advertising, aimed at avoiding legal liability or governmental sanctions.

Anti-Piracy Enforcement
Represented News Corp's Star TV and others in stopping piracy of its television programming through Internet streaming.

U.S. Olympic Committee
Counseled an internationally recognized client, which had endorsement deals with several athletes who participated in the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, about avoiding claims from the USOC over allegedly infringing and improperly using USOC trademarks.

Domain Name Disputes
Conducted numerous domain name and cybersquatting dispute actions before the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) pursuant to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

Title And Trademark Clearance Analyses And Opinions
Performed numerous title and trademark clearance analyses and litigation avoidance opinions for Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Cable, Sony Pictures Entertainment, StudioCanal, Focus Features, Overture Films, Batjac Productions, Lions Gate Entertainment, and many other studios involving broadcast and cable, television, film, website, and mobile properties.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Advised Mobile Messenger, Jamdat, Sprint, Samsung, and many others in the wireless and Internet industries concerning DMCA compliance and safe harbors.

Memberships

· Media Law Resource Center (MLRC)

· Los Angeles Copyright Society

· American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)

· International Trademark Association (INTA) (member of the U.S. Legislation Committee, 1990-94, 1999-2002; member of the Trademark Reporter Committee, (2008-2012)

· American Bar Association (ABA)

· State Bar of California (Intellectual Property Section)

· Beverly Hills Bar Association

Articles

· K. Raygor and V. Alter, Media Libel Law, Ninth Circuit Fumbles The Ball In Videogame Likeness Cases, 82 U.S. Law Week, at 364 (Bloomberg BNA, Sept. 10, 2013)

· K. Raygor and L. Petrich, Media Libel Law, "Survey Of California Libel Law" (Oxford University Press, 2012, 2013)

· K. Raygor (co-author), California State Antitrust And Unfair Competition Law, Chapter 12, "State Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property"(Matthew Bender, December 2009, 2010, 2012)

· K. Raygor and E. Komen, Limitations On Copyright Protection For Format Ideas In Reality Television Programming, Media Law Resource Center Bulletin, Issue No. 4, at 97-121 (December 2009)

· K. Raygor and V. Alter, Fair Use And The Right Of Publicity: A Search For A More Balanced Approach, Media Law Resource Center Bulletin, Issue No. 4, at 129-147 (December 2008)

· K. Raygor and B. Bakhtari, Great Success! 'Borat's' Release Agreement Averts Liability, New York Law Journal (July 16, 2008)

· K. Raygor and V. Alter, It's Not Just Make-Believe Anymore: Fantasy Baseball And The Right Of Publicity, ABA Media, Privacy And Defamation Law Committee Newsletter (ABA, Winter/Spring 2008)

· K. Raygor, Perfect 10 Scores A Not-So-Perfect Rating By The Ninth Circuit, MediaLawLetter (Media Law Resource Center, May 2007)

· K. Raygor and D. Ryan, The Cost of Protecting California's Royalty: Assault Liability Under the Anti-Paparazzi Act, MediaLawLetter (Media Law Resource Center, January 2006)

· K. Raygor, Sanitizing Hollywood: The Family Entertainment And Copyright Act Of 2005, MediaLawLetter (Media Law Resource Center, May 2005)

Speeches

· K. Raygor, The Perils Of Being Social In A Social Media World, presented in Los Angeles (July 16, 2013)

· K. Raygor, Pirates Of The Internet: Protecting The Rights Of Content Creators, presented to The Caucus For Producers, Writers & Directors (February 28, 2012)

· K. Raygor and G. Clark, Recent Significant Changes In Intellectual Property Law, presented for The Seminar Group (January 14, 2011)

· K. Raygor, Sex, Minors And Videotape, presented at the Donald E. Biederman Entertainment & Media Law Institute (January 14, 2010)

· K. Raygor, The Right Of Publicity, presented to the Sports & Entertainment Law Society of the University of La Verne College of Law (April 2, 2009)

· K. Raygor, Protection Of Celebrity Rights: What You Need To Know Now, presented at the USC Gould School of Law - Beverly Hills Bar Association 2008 Institute on Entertainment Law and Business (October 18, 2008)

· K. Raygor and E. Komen, Hollywood Clearances, presented in Los Angeles (November 15, 2007)

· K. Raygor and G. Cummins, Privacy-Misappropriation/Right Of Publicity, presented in Los Angeles (July 21, 2006)

· K. Raygor and J. Bassett, Trademark Clearance Boot Camp, presented in Los Angeles (June 23, 2006)

· K. Raygor, Surviving The Matrix: Legal Pitfalls Of Blurring Fact And Fiction, presented at the Donald E. Biederman Entertainment & Media Law Institute (January 26, 2006)

310.228.3730
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating N/A help_info

Areas of Law

  • Litigation
  • Intellectual Property
  • Copyrights
  • False Advertising, Lanham Act and Unfair Competition
  • IP Licensing, Technology and Commercial Transactions
  • Patent Litigation
  • Trade Secrets
  • Video Game
  • Trademark Applications and Prosecution
  • Trademarks and Trade Dress
  • Entertainment, Technology, and Advertising
  • International Practice
  • Korea
  • Advertising
  • Sports

 

Experience & Credentials

Position

Partner

Admission Details

Admitted in 1984, California

Law School Attended

Minnesota Law School
Class of 1984
J.D.
cum laude

University Attended

University of Minnesota
Class of 1976
B.A.
summa cum laude

Community Contributions

Contact Information

Phone

310.228.3730

Fax

310.228.3930

Email

Send email to Kent R. Raygor


Office Information
Kent R. Raygor
Partner
 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1600,
Los Angeles, CA 90067

Loading...

Logo
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (Los Angeles, California)

About Client Rating
About Peer Rating

Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

Determining a Rating

The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

  • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
  • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
  • 1-2.9 Rated

Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

The Reviewers

Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.

Anonymity

Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

Martindale-Hubbell's role

Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.