- Co-Managing Partner
Amy T. Brantly is a founding partner of Kesselman Brantly Stockinger LLP. Ms. Brantly has significant experience in a range of complex litigation cases, including antitrust, fraud, trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty, trademark litigation, and class actions. Before co-founding Kesselman Brantly Stockinger, Ms. Brantly was an attorney at Susman Godfrey LLP, where she worked on some of the biggest antitrust cases in the country as well as numerous class actions. Her antitrust experience includes litigating group boycott cases, exclusionary contracting practices, price fixing, and bid-rigging involving numerous markets, including, cosmetics, semiconductors, medical devices, insurance and sports. Ms. Brantly has worked on the antitrust side of several cases where both antitrust and patent infringement claims were alleged and she is a contributing editor of the leading treatise in California on antitrust and unfair competition law, specifically editing the chapter on state antitrust law and intellectual property. Ms. Brantly has argued cases in both state and federal courts and in arbitration.
In addition to being acknowledged several times as a “Rising Star” in litigation and a “Top Woman Attorney in Southern California,” Ms. Brantly also was named a Super Lawyer in 2015 through 2022. She was also named one of the “Top Women Lawyers” by the Los Angeles Daily Journal in 2020. Ms. Brantly is an active member of the Los Angeles legal community and has served as the President of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles (WLALA) in 2017-2018. She was also elected to the Chancery Club of Los Angeles and has served as a member of the Steering Committee for the LACBA/WLALA Joint Task Force on Retention and Promotion of Women in the Profession. Ms. Brantly has served on the WLALA Board of Governors since 2010.
Ms. Brantly graduated from Fordham University School of Law, where she served as a member of the Fordham Moot Court Board and the Fordham Environmental Law Journal.
Areas Of Practice
- Business litigation
- Trade Secrets Litigation
- Breach of Contract matters
- Financial Fraud Cases
- Trade Libel and False Advertising
- Lanham Act Claims
- Class Actions
- Trademark Litigation
- TCPA Litigation and Consulting
- California, 2000
- New York, 2000
- U.S. District Court Central District of California
- U.S. District Court Southern District of New York
- U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York
- U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit
- Fordham University School of Law, New York, New York
- J.D. - 1999
- Honors: Member, Fordham Moot Court Board
- California State University of Fullerton, Fullerton, California
- B.A. - 1995
- Honors: magna cum laude
- PlusPass, Inc. v. Verra Mobility Corp.; Case No. 2-:20-CV-10078-SB-SK (C.D. Cal.) – Ms. Brantly and KBS represent PlusPass in a lawsuit asserting antitrust claims against Verra Mobility Corp. After extensive briefing and oral argument, the District Court agreed with our position and denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss in its entirety. The case is now in discovery.
- Soleiman Professional Dental Corp. v. Pacific Dental Services, LLC; Case No. 20STCV42885 (LA Superior Court) – Ms. Brantly and KBS represent a periodontist group in a lawsuit against a dental service organization asserting state antitrust claims. The case is now in discovery.
- Beckman Coulter, Inc. v. Quidel Corp., (San Diego Super. Ct.) – Ms. Brantly and Mr. Stockinger represented Defendant Quidel Corp. in this antitrust case brought under California’s Cartwright Act and Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code Section 16600. Beckman alleged that a provision placing restrictions on sales of testing products related to the diagnosis of congestive heart failure in a contract between Beckman and Quidel is an illegal non-compete and unreasonably restrains trade. After the trial court granted summary judgment on Beckman’s Section 16600 claim, the Court of Appeals reversed and the California Supreme Court granted certiorari. The California Supreme Court ultimately transferred the case back to the lower courts after ruling in Ixchel Pharma LLC v. Biogen, Inc., 9 Cal. 5th 1130 (2020), that a non-compete clause between businesses is subject to a rule of reason analysis.
- Curtin Maritime Corp. v. Santa Catalina Island Co., (C.D. Cal.) – David Kesselman and Amy Brantly represented Plaintiff Curtin Maritime in this antitrust case brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act for conspiracy to monopolize the shipping of freight from the California mainland to Avalon.
- Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. v. Random Tuesday, Inc., et al. (C.D. Cal.) – Amy Brantly represented Random Tuesday in this trademark and copyright infringement case brought by Warner Bros. alleging that KBS's non-profit client infringed Warner Bros. intellectual property rights with respect to the Harry Potter and Gilmore Girls entertainment franchises.
- Dane S. Field, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of Aloha Sports Inc. v. The National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n (Haw. Circuit Court) – Amy Brantly and KBS represent Aloha Sports in this case brought under Hawaii’s state antitrust statute arguing that the NCAA unfairly decertified the Seattle Bowl in order to disrupt a sale of Aloha Sports. Ms. Brantly successfully argued to the Hawaii Supreme Court that summary judgment should not have been granted on Aloha Sport’s Hawaiian state law antitrust claim against the NCAA. The opinion clarified the proof necessary for a plaintiff to succeed on an antitrust claim under Hawaii law. In a unanimous, 39-page, published opinion, the Supreme Court held that the lower courts erroneously required Aloha Sports to prove that the NCAA – while engaging in an unfair method of competition resulting in injury to Aloha Sports – actually harmed competition. The Hawaii Supreme Court also reaffirmed that a plaintiff may generally describe the relevant market without resort to expert testimony. A copy of the opinion can be found at http://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/SCWC-15-0000663.pdf. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the circuit court for trial.
- Guillermo Mata v. Fletcher Jones of Chicago, Ltd., et al. (N.D. Ill.) – Amy Brantly and David Kesselman represented Defendant Kaarya, LLC d/b/a myKaarma in this putative class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The case settled after myKaarma filed its motion to dismiss and before significant discovery commenced.
- Epps v. Earth Fare, Inc. (9th Cir.) – Amy Brantly and David Kesselman represented Defendant Earth fare in TCPA litigation brought in federal court in the Central District of California. KBS won on a motion to dismiss the case with prejudice and represented Earth Fare in plaintiff’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal holding that plaintiff did not reasonably revoke consent to receive text messages from Earth Fare.
- DotConnectAfrica Trust v. ICANN and ZA Central Registry (C.D. Cal.), Ms. Brantly and Mr. Kesselman represented defendant ZA Central Registry in this case involving the award of the generic top-level domain name, .Africa. and claims of various business torts filed by a competitor that failed to prevail in the bidding process with ICANN.
- Market Lofts Community Assn. v. 9th Street Market Lofts, LLC (Cal. Superior Court, County of Los Angeles), Ms. Brantly, Mr. Stockinger and Mr. Dakak represented a homeowner's association against developers of a condominium complex and parking structure seeking declaratory relief and damages for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud, among other things.
- In re Containerboard Antitrust Litig. (N.D. Ill.), Horizontal price-fixing case in which Ms. Brantly and Mr. Stockinger represented Plaintiff class of direct purchasers of containerboard products. KBS’s efforts contributed to settlements from five defendants for an amount exceeding $367 million.
- American Institute of Intradermal Cosmetics v. Society of Permanent Cosmetic Professionals (C.D. Cal.), Ms. Brantly, Mr. Kesselman and Mr. Stockinger represented a manufacturer and distributor of permanent cosmetic products in an alleged group boycott action against direct competitors and their trade association.
- Tessera Technologies, Inc. v. Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. (Cal. Superior Court, County of San Francisco), Ms. Brantly represented Tessera in an antitrust action against Hynix alleging a conspiracy to boycott in the DRAM market under California's Cartwright Act.
- International Oncology Network Solutions v. Eagle (District Court, Collin County Texas), Ms. Brantly defended Raintree Oncology, an emerging health care company, against a division of Amerisource Bergen in a misappropriation of trade secrets case.
- Masimo Corp. v. Tyco Healthcare Group (C.D. Cal.), Ms. Brantly and Mr. Kesselman represented Masimo against Tyco in an antitrust case involving challenges to exclusionary contracting practices, including exclusive dealing with OEMs, exclusionary loyalty discounts and sole-source contracts.
- White v. NCAA (C.D. Cal.), Ms. Brantly and Mr. Kesselman represented college athletes in an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA involving restrictions on athletic-based financial aid.
- In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litig. (MDL 1663 D.N.J.), Ms. Brantly defended Lloyd's of London Syndicates in an antitrust action alleging a conspiracy involving undisclosed contingent commissions and bid-rigging.
- In re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Marketing Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litig. (MDL 2151 C.D. Cal.), Ms. Brantly represented class members in multi-district litigation against Toyota Motor Corp. based on claims under California's False Advertising Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition law.
Honors And Awards
- Named one of the “Top Women Lawyers” by the Los Angeles Daily Journal, November 2020
- “Top Women Attorneys in Southern California,” 2013, 2015-2017, 2019
- Southern California “Super Lawyer," 2015 - 2022
- Nominated as a 2019 Leader in Litigation by the Los Angeles Business Journal
- Adjunct Professor, Legal Drafting, Loyola Law School (2023-present)
Professional Associations and Memberships
- Los Angeles County Bar Association, Member
- American Bar Association, Member
- American Bar Foundation, Fellow
- State Bar of California, Member
- Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, Board of Governors
- Chancery Club, Member
- New York State Bar, Member
- Panelist, “Celebrating Women In Competition Law,” California Lawyers Association Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section 2020
- Moderator, “#MeToo – Revealing and Reshaping the Legal Field,” Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles 2018
- Featured Speaker, RISE Three Year Anniversary Celebration 2017
- Moderator, Navigating the Path Towards Your Dream Law Job, Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles 2016
- Moderator, Navigating the Path Towards Partnership, Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles 2015
- Panelist, Class Action Waivers and Class Arbitrations, Bridgeport Continuing Education 2012
- Panelist, Taking and Defending Depositions, Pincus Professional Education 2012
- Moderator, WLALA Litgators Forum, Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles 2012
- Panelist, Women Leaders Forum, California State University Northridge 2010
Pro Bono Activities
- Public Counsel, Volunteer Attorney
- LACBA Mentorship Program at Garfield High School, Mentor, 2009 – 2010
- Team Prime Time Mock Trial Program Volunteer, 2014 – 2016
- Susman Godfrey LLP, Associate, Of Counsel, 2000 – 2013
- “The Correlation Between Antitrust Enforcement and Gender Equality,” Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Journal, California Lawyer Association, Spring 2021, Vol. 31, No. 1
- “The Cases Against Facebook,” Column in LA and SF Daily Journal, December 21, 2020 (co-author with David Kesselman)
- “Is the DOJ’s Google antitrust lawsuit just the beginning?”, Column in LA and SF Daily Journal, October 28, 2020 (co-author with David Kesselman)
- “Will Congress restore antitrust to protect competition?”, Column in LA and SF Daily Journal, October 26, 2020 (co-author with David Kesselman)
- “What To Expect From Arguments in TCPA Facebook Case,” Law 360, December 3, 2020
- "hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn Corp.: Protecting Smaller Data Rivals From Attempted Data Monopolists," Antitrust, UCL And Privacy Section, California Lawyers Association, September 2019 eBriefs Issue
- "Unfair Competition and the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016", Association of Business Trial Lawyers Report, Winter, 2017
- Contributing Editor, California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, Chapter 12, State Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property, 2014-2020
- The Supreme Court Holds The Federal Arbitration Act Trumps State-Law Public Policy, Century City Lawyer, June 2011 Issue