Mattel Argues Huge Bratz Award Was Built Upon Errors
Professor Kathleen Sullivan is quoted by Amanda Bronstad of the Recorder in the following story on a recent appeal filed by Mattel in a dispute with MGA Entertainment Inc. over Bratz doll.
The $310 million judgment against Mattel Inc. in its long-running dispute against Bratz doll maker MGA Entertainment Inc. should be reversed because it was based on inaccurate damages calculations and erroneous billing invoices from 11 law firms, Mattel argued in its latest appellate filing.
"Rather than engage these deficiencies in the record, MGA rehashes its rhetorical attack on Mattel for supposedly suppressing competition in the market for dolls," wrote Mattel attorney Kathleen Sullivan, a New York partner at Los Angeles-based Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan.
"The district court's mistaken assumption that MGA spent all $129 million on defensive fees infects it entire award," Sullivan wrote.
She cited tens of millions of dollars in duplicative billings, discounts and work contracted out to other firms. "Mattel has been ordered to bear these fees, even though MGA will never pay them," she wrote.
At a minimum, the fee award should be remanded for recalculation, with Mattel given a chance to review invoices that so far have been redacted, Sullivan wrote.