George Murphy focuses his practice on complex federal court litigation involving business litigation, patent disputes, product liability, and cases involving the acquisition or disposition of large companies. Mr. Murphy has successfully represented numerous public and private companies in all phases of civil trial and appellate practice in state and federal courts across the United States, as well as before arbitration tribunals. Mr. Murphy has been particularly effective in leading teams of attorneys in large complex patent and commercial cases as counsel for Fortune 500 companies.
Mr. Murphy is also knowledgeable in the areas of alternative fee agreements and early case assessment and has been featured on several occasions as a speaker or panelist on these topics. Over the years he has held a number of significant firm management positions, including responsibility for the firm's Litigation department and as leader of the firm's Complex Business Litigation team.
Mr. Murphy has been named a Georgia "Super Lawyer" in Business Litigation and Intellectual Property Litigation by SuperLawyers magazine for several years, most recently in 2012 for Business Litigation. He has also been recognized in the 2012 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® for Litigation - Patent. Mr. Murphy is listed in the 2009, 2010 and 2011 editions of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business for Commercial Litigation and has been recognized as one of Georgia Trend's "Legal Elite" in Business Law. He is also recognized as one of the top business litigators in the nation by a 2009 Corporate Counsel Edition of SuperLawyers magazine. He is AV® rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
Professional & Community Activities
Eleventh Circuit Historical Society, Georgia Vice President
Phi Beta Kappa, Member
Industries
Chemical; Financial Services; Health Care; Paper & Packaging; Manufacturing
Experience
The Coca Cola Co. v. PepsiCo Inc., et al., Represented Pepsi-Cola Co. and PepsiCo in a patent infringement suit brought by Coca-Cola in the Northern District of Georgia involving bag-in-box technology used to store and dispense syrup used to create soft drinks in soda fountains. The court granted Pepsi's Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that the technology was substantially different from what was described in the Coke patent. PepsiCo's use of this technology did not infringe Coke's technology described in the asserted patent, and therefore, did not infringe the patent.
The Coca Cola Co. v. PepsiCo Inc., et al., 500 F. Supp.2d 1364 (N.D. Ga. 2007).
Arbitration regarding purchase price adjustment of a sale of a cruise line *, The firm served as lead counsel in representation of seller of cruise line. Recovered substantial arbitration award in purchase price adjustment proceeding initiated by buyer.
Complex business litigation for seller of large aircraft fuel services company *, The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of seller of large aircraft fuel services company and recovered substantial award in purchase price adjustment proceeding initiated by buyer.
E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company v. Sierra Stone LLC et al., Successfully represented E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and obtained significant monetary recovery from distributor following distributor's termination.
E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. v. Sierra Stone LLC, Case No. 2006CV113367 (Super. Ct. Fulton County, Ga. filed Mar. 1, 2006); Stoneworkz IP Holding Co., LLC v. Turnberry Stone, LLC, Case No. 06-03366 (Dist. Ct. Dallas County, Tex. filed Apr. 6, 2006).
Wilkins et al. v. PPG Industries, Inc. et al., Successfully defended E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company in a toxic tort action claiming wrongful death allegedly caused by exposure to trace benzene.
Represented leading financial protection company in multi-million dollar rescission action and in disputes with placing agents, The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of a leading financial protection company in connection with multiple lawsuits seeking to rescind $40 million in fraudulently obtained life insurance and millions in related premiums. The firm successfully defended an appeal before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and secured a $1.4 million award against a former agent who received commissions in connection with fraudulent policies.
Genetic Technologies Limited v. Beckman Coulter, Inc. et al., Represented Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. in a patent infringement action filed by Genetic Technologies Limited ("GTG"). The plaintiff sued nine defendants in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin alleging patent infringement of its patent relating to methods of analysis of non-coding DNA sequences. Several large companies had previously been involved in litigation with GTG over this patent. As a result of licenses GTG negotiated with those defendants, GTG sought millions of dollars in past damages and future license fees from Pioneer. Because of intensive defensive efforts and factual investigation, we approached GTG regarding settlement. These discussions resulted in a favorable settlement of the matter, the terms of which are confidential.
Genetic Technologies Limited v. Beckman Coulter, Inc. et al., No. 3:10-cv-00069 (W.D. Wisc. filed Feb. 11, 2010).
Importers Service Corporation v. Georgia-Pacific Resins, Inc., Lead counsel representing GP Chemicals Equity LLC (GP) in an action alleging breach of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment, violations of the Lanham Act, and violations of Georgia's Fair Business Practices Act. We obtained summary judgment and the court entered judgment in GP's favor on all claims asserted against it. On appeal.
Importers Service Corporation v. GP Chemicals Equity LLC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Civil Action File No. 1:07-cv-00745-JOF.
Juan Washington et al. v. Ford Motor Company et al., Represented E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company in a wrongful death action claiming that a young child died in a house fire allegedly caused by an automobile's speed control deactivation device that was subject to one of the largest automotive recalls in the history of the United States. DuPont was named as a defendant because it produced a component part that was used in the speed control deactivation device. After moving for summary judgment based on the lack of credible causation evidence or expert testimony, plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their claims against DuPont for very little consideration.
Trademark infringement case for a consumer products company *, Successfully coordinated the interstate seizure of infringing products for a consumer products company in a multimillion dollar trademark infringement case.
Reid v. American Optical Corporation et al., Negotiated the voluntary dismissals, without payment, of hundreds of toxic tort - Silica lawsuits filed in multiple jurisdictions following initial aggressive defensive motion practice.
Billing dispute between a major hospital owner and a managed care company, Successfully represented a major hospital owner in connection with a dispute with a managed care company.
Compel company sale of New York based entertainment company, Successfully represented major investors in New York based entertainment company to break board deadlock and ultimately obtain control to compel the sale of the company.
*Experience gained by attorney prior to joining Kilpatrick Townsend
News
21 February 2012, Kilpatrick Townsend Once Again Achieves Top Recognition in 2012 Georgia Super Lawyers, News Releases
10 November 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Media Report -- November 4 - 10, 2011, News Releases
07 November 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend's George Murphy: Featured Speaker at Practising Law Institute's Patent Litigation 2011 Program, News Releases
06 September 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Earns Record-Breaking Recognition in Annual Best Lawyers in America 2012, News Releases
13 June 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Again Earns Highest Recognition From CHAMBERS USA 2011, News Releases
02 March 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Once Again Achieves Top Recognition in 2011 Georgia Super Lawyers, News Releases
28 September 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton's George Murphy Serves as Featured Speaker at Prominent 2010 DuPont & Widener University School of Law IP Seminar, News Releases
14 June 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Again Earns Highest Recognition From CHAMBERS USA 2010, News Releases
04 March 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Ranked Number One in Five 2010 Georgia Super Lawyer Categories, News Releases
09 February 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Partner George Murphy: Featured Panelist at Prestigious Association of Corporate Patent Counsel Conference, News Releases
15 June 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Once Again Earns Highest Recognition From Chambers USA, News Releases
04 March 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Attorneys Named Top Business Litigators by 2009 Super Lawyers Corporate Counsel Edition, News Releases
02 March 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Ranked Number One in Five Georgia Super Lawyer Categories, News Releases
Events
14 November 2011, Why is Patent Litigation so Expensive? NPE and Managing Multiple Co-Defendant Cases, Events
21 September 2010, Implications for Patent Infringement: A "Tiny" Part Of My Product Infringes; So What's the Damage? The Federal Circuit Speaks, Events
31 January 2010, What We Learned about Resolving IP Disputes in an Economic Downturn and How to Apply Those Lessons Going Forward, Events
29 October 2008, Deal Indigestion: Strategies for Dealing with Post-Acquisition Purchase Price Adjustment Disputes, Events
01 April 2008, Alternative Fee Agreements, Events
31 March 2008, 2008 Corporate Counsel Forum on Reducing Legal Costs in New York, Events
01 April 2007, Electronic Discovery and Related Issues, Events
01 January 2007, Early Case Assessment, Events