Kyle P. O’Malley

Associate

(he/him)

  • Employment

  • Class Actions

  • Intellectual Property

  • Commercial

  • Appeals

After graduating from the University of Virginia School of Law, Kyle returned to his home state of California and joined the firm’s trial and appellate practice, where he focuses on employment, consumer, privacy, commercial, and intellectual property matters. He is honored to carry on the firm’s tradition of fighting for employees, minorities, artists, consumers, and others harmed, exploited, or marginalized by the powerful and unscrupulous.

Outside of his law practice, Kyle serves as a Commissioner on the Oakland Mayor’s Commission on Persons with Disabilities, the City’s designated advisory body for issues affecting residents with disabilities. Kyle also serves on the California Lawyers Association’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee. He is also an associate and alumnus of the Telluride Association, an organization dedicated to preparing and inspiring promising students to lead and serve through free, transformative educational experiences rooted in critical thinking and democratic community.

Kyle lives in Oakland with his husband and their two rescues. In his free time, he can be found painting and exploring nature.

 

  • Stanford University (BA - English Literature)

    University of Virginia School of Law (JD)

  • Raines v. US Healthworks (SD Cal.; Ninth Circuit; Cal. Supreme Court) – Represent a putative class of 500,000 job applicants subjected to discriminatory, invasive, non-job-related medical screenings which defendants required be completed as a condition of employment in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and California privacy law. Ninth Circuit certified question to California Supreme Court in March 2022. Matter pending.

    Whistleblower v. Tech Company (Alameda Superior) – Represented employee alleging whistleblower retaliation, discrimination, and pay gap claims against employer tech company. Confidential settlement reached on the eve of trial.

    Employee v. Company (ND Cal.) – Represented employee in an age discrimination case. Employee alleged that company denied her a promotion that went instead to a woman 30 years younger and that, about a year later, company fired her. Matter settled on the eve of trial, after the district court denied company’s motions to exclude testimony by employee’s experts and a whistleblower expected to confirm that Employee was targeted by management for termination.

    Founder v. Company (Arbitration) – Represented co-founder of Company in connection with claims for unpaid wages, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty. The parties resolved their differences amicably.

    Patient v. Doctor (San Francisco Superior) – Represented patient of Doctor in right of publicity and invasion of privacy matter against Doctor, television station, and ad agency in connection with defendant’s use of client’s “before-and-after” surgery photos in television commercials without permission. The parties resolved the matter amicably shortly after Doctor was ordered to provide its financial records to Patient.

    Artist v. Tech Company (ND Cal.) – Represented Oakland artist in copyright infringement action against tech company, production company, and music publisher for unauthorized use of iconic Bay Area hip hop anthem in streaming TV series. The matter was resolved amicably.

    US Cosmetics Company v. French Cosmetics Company (Marin Superior) – Represented US cosmetics outfit in business and intellectual property dispute with French joint venturer in trial court and on related appeal. The matter was resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the parties.

    Photographer v. Publication (ND Cal.) – Defended local publication in copyright infringement action brought by photographer. The matter settled for a confidential amount prior to discovery commencing.

    Musician v. Talent Agency (Alameda Superior) – Represented musicians in a putative class action (the first such action of its kind) alleging talent agency violated Talent Agencies Act and the Unfair Competition Law. Matter settled.

    Various Trademark Matters – litigation in federal courts and before the TTAB; prosecution of applications for registration and maintenance of registered marks; counseling for businesses and individuals concerning trademark matters; negotiation of coexistence and consent agreements. Item description

  • State Bar of California

    California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA)

    California Lawyers Association

    • Labor & Employment Law Section

    • Litigation Section

    • Intellectual Property Section

    • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee (2022-2023 term)

    Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom (BALIF)

    Bar Association of San Francisco

    • Litigation Section

    • Appellate Section

    • Labor & Employment Section

  • State Bar of California

    Southern, Central, and Northern Districts of California

    Ninth Circuit

News