Sony B. Barari

Bartko Wins Top Defense Verdict

San Francisco, CA — The Bartko trial team from the In Re Francesca Naify case received a Daily Journal award as one of California’s top five defense verdicts in 2023, and the top trust and estate case verdict. Ben Riley, Rob Bunzel, and Sony Barari tried the case over five weeks, with 93 hours of testimony.  The case involved deceased United Artists theater tycoon Robert Naify and claims by his step-daughter that Naify did not provide his deceased wife with her full share of his $2.3 billion in assets.  The trial presented cutting-edge principals of probate and community property law, and a total damages claim of $680 million.

Bartko Clients Win $680 Million Francesca Naify Case

The San Francisco Superior Court entered its Statement of Decision and Judgment in favor of Bartko clients, the Co-Trustees of the Robert A. Naify Trust, and against Petitioner Christina Cortese.  Cortese had sought as much as $680 million in community property damages on behalf of her deceased mother.  The Court’s Statement of Decision rejected all of Ms. Cortese’s claims and damages, and Judgment has been entered for the Co-Trustees.

Bartko Trial Team Named California Attorneys of the Year!

Bartko attorneys Ben Riley, Sony Barari, Rob Bunzel, and Gabriella Wilkins were named 2022 California Attorneys of the Year, following their complete trial victory in the Robert A. Naify Trust case. The petitioner in that case claimed that her step-father, Robert Naify, promised to leave her his golf course in Spain, and to treat her the same as his biological daughters in his final trust. After a three-week trial where the petitioner sought at least $250 million, Judge Richard Ulmer rejected the oral promise claim.The Daily Journal and California Lawyer magazine selected the Bartko Naify trial team as one of 12 California Attorneys of the Year. The pdf article can be viewed here.

Bartko Secures Trial Victory in $250+ Million Alleged Oral Promise Case

Bartko clients, the Co-Trustees of the Robert A. Naify Trust, won a complete victory after a court trial held in February and March 2021.  The Petitioner, Christina Cortese, alleged that her stepfather, Robert Naify, orally promised to leave her a golf course in Marbella, Spain, and to treat her the same as his two biological daughters in his final trust.  Ms. Cortese, represented by Holland & Knight, sought recovery of the golf course and other assets worth between $250 million and $300 million.  The Bartko team argued that Ms. Cortese could not meet the required standard of clear and convincing proof, and put on substantial evidence from Robert Naify’s wills and trusts, actions, and documents disproving the petitioner’s claims.

Federal Circuit Declines Request for Rehearing En Banc in High Profile, Non-Invasive Prenatal Genetic Testing Patent Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has denied the appellants’ request for rehearing en banc of the consolidated appeal of Ariosa v. Sequenom, Inc. and Natera v. Sequenom, Inc.  BartkoZankel clients Natera and DNA Diagnostics Centers, providers of non-invasive prenatal genetic tests, filed a declaratory judgment action in 2012 seeking a determination that defendant Sequenom’s patent is invalid.  After consolidating the case with a similar suit brought by Ariosa, Judge Susan Illston of the Northern District of California ruled that the patent-in-suit is invalid because its claims are not directed to patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  In June 2015, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel unanimously affirmed Judge Illston’s decision.  The widely read Patently-O blog described the decision as the “leading case” in patentability jurisprudence.

Federal Circuit Affirms Grant of Declaratory Judgment Obtained by BartkoZankel in Non-Invasive Prenatal Genetic Testing Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Northern District’s grant of summary judgment in favor of BartkoZankel’s clients Natera, Inc. and DNA Diagnostics, Corp. in Natera v. Sequenom, Inc.  In a consolidated appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld the ruling of District Court Judge Susan Illston that the patent-in-suit is invalid because its claims are not directed to patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  The widely-read patent law blog Patently-O stated that the case “has significant long-term implications for patent-eligibility not only in biotechnology, but in other fields where invention is based primarily on discovery.”

BartkoZankel Obtains Final Approval in Financial Advisor Class Settlement

The firm, representing a defined class of 135 former Wells Fargo financial adviser executives, obtained court approval of a settlement against the bank for a total of $7.42 million.  Wakefield, et al. v. Wells Fargo Company, et al., 3:13-05053 LB (ND Cal.).  The settlement also requires Wells to cease forfeiting deferred compensation of financial advisers who leave the bank to work for competitors. View pdf copy of the Order. The suit was commenced in 2013, on behalf of California and North Dakota financial advisers whose deferred compensation was forfeited due to competition, in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600 and related provisions of North Dakota law.  After motion practice, mediation, and document discovery, the parties settled on terms which return to the plaintiff financial advisers 99% of their forfeited compensation for those plaintiffs who left Wells within four years of the suit being filed, and $10,000 each to those plaintiffs who left Wells earlier than four years before suit was filed.  The trial Judge, the Hon. Laurel Beeler, described the result as an “excellent recovery for class members” in her Order approving the final settlement.  Class recoveries of nearly 100% for class members are virtually unheard of and the firm is very proud of this result.  The settlement that was approved followed a mediation conducted by the Hon. Ron Sabraw (Ret.) of JAMS, and was prosecuted in conjunction with co-counsel at the Florida firm Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP.  BartkoZankel attorneys responsible for the result include William Edlund, Rob Bunzel and Sony Barari.

Federal Court Orders Diablo to Pay Netlist Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Oakland, California

Netlist Wins Major Legal Victory in Trade Secret, Breach of Contract Lawsuit Against Diablo Technologies, Inc.

Oakland, California

Court Denies Motion to Strike In Netlist Patent Case

April 1, 2014 – BartkoZankel and co-counsel achieved a significant result for client Netlist on April 1, 2014, with the court’s Order denying Defendants’ motion to strike Netlist’s patent infringement contentions.  The court agreed that Netlist’s contentions were sufficiently stated based on the publicly known information available to Netlist, even though Netlist had not yet obtained the accused ULLtraDIMM product.The BartkoZankel team consists of Ben Riley, Rob Bunzel, Paul Schuck, Sony Barari and Simon Goodfellow. View PDF copy of the article.