• vcard
310.229.1311
  • Education
    • J.D., Loyola Law School-Los Angeles, 1995, Order of the Coif; Sayre Macneil Scholar; St. Thomas More Law Society; Alpha Sigma Nu; National Jesuit Honor Society Recipient of American Jurisprudence Award for Constitutional Law II Law Review
    • B.A., University of California-Los Angeles, 1988
  • Court Admissions
    • Supreme Court of California
    • Federal Court of California
    • State of California
    • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
    • U.S. District Court, Central District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
Todd M. Malynn works closely and passionately with innovative clients in the field of intellectual property. He understands the value of a business’s intellectual property and makes it his mission to help protect their assets. Todd concentrates his litigation practice on providing clients counsel across a wide spectrum of matters, including: 
  • Patent, trademark and copyright infringement
  • False advertising
  • Misappropriation of trade secrets
  • Unfair competition and covenants not to compete
He has also defended clients under the Medical Device Regulation Act (Medical Device Amendments of 1976). He aggressively seeks to identify solutions – whether through settlement or through trial. Todd was instrumental in receiving the largest jury verdict in California in 2011 (as reported by the Daily Journal) in a case involving misappropriation of trade secrets. He was also part of the team that received the largest jury verdict for a patent infringement action in California in 2014 (as reported by the Daily Journal). Todd has worked with leading market research experts in New York and California and routinely brings actions to protect trademarks and copyrights from counterfeits and infringement. He has obtained injunctions, conducted seizures and received orders against internet sites and related businesses through which internet sites conduct business, including common carriers. 

Todd combines intellectual property and business transactional experience to protect the interests from a broad array of claims. He has defended large advertising campaigns from claims of false advertising, including claims brought by the Federal Trade Commission as well as private class action lawsuits. Todd has handled matters before self-regulatory bodies, such as the Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program of the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureaus and the National Advertising Review Board. He has represented both current and former employers in connection with covenants not to compete, including before the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in multi-jurisdictional cases involving the validity and enforceability of such covenants. Todd also has significant experience representing manufacturers of Class III medical devices, including numerous reported decisions enforcing federal preemption under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976.
  • Trademark/Copyright Enforcement: Represented leading privately held cosmetic company in multiple enforcement actions. Obtained ex parte seizure order against Internet site. Hand & Nail Harmony, Inc. v. International Nails. Obtained order against common carrier importing counterfeit goods. Hand & Nail Harmony, Inc. v. Lenguyen. 
  • Trade Secrets: Represented medical device manufacturer in action against former employee and Chinese start-up venture, obtaining a $2.3 billion damages finding by jury. St. Jude Medical, Inc. v. Nervicon Ltd.
  • Patent Infringement: Represented medical device company in patent infringement action, resulting in a $31 million jury verdict. Alfred E. Mann Foundation v. Cochlear Corporation
  • Covenants not to Compete: Represented medical device company in multiple proceedings protecting new hires, resulting in multiple decisions under California law, including Dowell v. Biosense Webster, Inc. (no trade secret exception under B&PC 16600), Edwards v. Arthur Anderson, LLP (Amicus counsel) (no narrow restraint exception under B&PC 16600), Advanced Bionics Corp. v. Medtronic, Inc. (setting standard as to when California courts may enjoin parallel litigation in other state), Chazen Medical Device, Inc. v. Sulzer Intermedics (Ninth Circuit decision affirming preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of restrictive covenants in another state). 
  • Federal Preemption: Represented medical device company in products liability actions enforcing federal preemption, obtaining numerous decision. Franzese v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.; Viserta v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.; Smith v. St. Jude CRMD Division; Knight v. St. Jude Medical; Mullan v. St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc.
text icon Publications & Presentations
Competition, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section of the State Bar of California, Vol. 18, No. 1,
Spring 2009
text icon Publications & Presentations
Competition, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section of the State Bar of California, Vol. 13, No. 1
Spring 2004
text icon Publications & Presentations
Competition, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section of the State Bar of California, Vol. 12, No. 1
Summer 2003