Peter S. Veregge, Lawyer at Cislo & Thomas LLP

Peter S. Veregge, Partner Attorney
Intellectual Property

Phone:805-496-1164
Web:www.cisloandthomas.com
Address: 2829 Townsgate Road, Suite 330, Westlake Village, CA 91361-3006

Law Firm:	Cislo & Thomas LLP
Lawyer:	Peter S. Veregge
Phone:	805-496-1164
Fax:
Lawyer Title:	Partner
Practice Areas:	Intellectual Property
Bio:	Representative Cases: Kim Seng v. J&A Importers, 810 F. Supp. 2d 1046 (C.D. Cal. 2011). Successfully defended J&A Importers against a claim of copyright and trade dress infringement for noodle packaging. The court granted our summary judgment motion on all claims, because the plaintiff was unable to prove it possessed the IP rights it asserted. In addition, we obtained a substantial attorney fee award. The case subsequently settled while on appeal.Reshare v. Nikken, Case No. 10-CV-01936 JNE (D. Minn. 2011). Successfully negotiated a settlement of this patent infringement suit involving a computer-assisted selling system.Enagic v. Tseng, (C.D. Cal. 2010): Litigated a trademark infringement case for water ionizing machines on behalf of Enagic, based on defendant's use of client's mark in advertising. Case settled after discovery. Enagic USA v. Cabados (C.D. Cal. 2008): Litigated a trademark infringement case on behalf of Enagic. Case settled.MH Systems v. McNulty (C.D. Cal. 2010): Litigated a patent infringement case involving a ballast water treatment system. Court granted our client, McNulty, a judgment whereby the patent owner took nothing.International Seaway Trading v. Walgreen Co., 589 F. 3d. 1233 (Fed. Cir., 2009): The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals adopted our argument that the legal standard the Federal Circuit had used for over twenty-five years in determining whether a design patent is invalid must be overturned. As a result of this decision, d
Admitted:	1991, California; 1992, U.S. District Court, Central and Northern District of California; 1999, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit; 2001, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals; 2007, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan; 2013, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California; registered to practice before U.S. Patent and Trademark Office;
College:	University of California at Santa Barbara, Class of 1984, B.S., Geological Sciences
Law School:	Loyola Law School, Class of 1991, J.D.
Membership:	State Bar of California (Member, Intellectual Property Section)United States Patent & Trademark Office (Registered Patent Attorney)Ventura County Bar Association (Member, Intellectual Property Section).
Web:	www.cisloandthomas.com
Languages:	English

Lawyer Peter S. Veregge, graduated from University of California at Santa Barbara, Class of 1984, B.S., Geological Sciences Loyola Law School, Class of 1991, J.D., is now employed by Cislo & Thomas LLP at 2829 Townsgate Road, Suite 330 Westlake Village, CA 91361-3006.

While being a member of State Bar of California (Member, Intellectual Property Section)United States Patent & Trademark Office (Registered Patent Attorney)Ventura County Bar Association (Member, Intellectual Property Section)., Peter S. Veregge is one of the more than one million lawyers in United States. Before choosing Peter S. Veregge as your lawyer, you should consider whether Peter S. Veregge offers free consultation, (if not) how much the initial interview costs, if there is any hidden attorney fees, what's the fee schedule, whether he or she has good community reputation and is able to provide a list of good references. You can also contact the Board of Professional Responsibility of the state bar, to find out if Peter S. Veregge has ever been placed under any disciplinary actions. Please be aware that, though Peter S. Veregge's office is located at Westlake Village, CA, he or she might belong to the bar association of other states.

You should also ask how long the lawyer has been in practice, how much experience he or she has in cases like yours, and more importantly, the outcomes of those cases! Focus of the lawyer's practice and years of experience are also very important factors in your evaluation process. The more focused the lawyer's practice areas, the better service he or she could provide. So do not make decisions solely on one or two factors. Only hire lawyers you feel comfortable with as they will represent you and your interests, and you will be sharing private details about your life with them.

Peter S. Veregge has been admitted in 1991, California; 1992, U.S. District Court, Central and Northern District of California; 1999, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit; 2001, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals; 2007, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan; 2013, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California; registered to practice before U.S. Patent and Trademark Office;. His or her practice areas include Intellectual Property.

Peter S. Veregge's college and law school education includes University of California at Santa Barbara, Class of 1984, B.S., Geological Sciences, Loyola Law School, Class of 1991, J.D.. Other biographical background includes Representative Cases: Kim Seng v. J&A Importers, 810 F. Supp. 2d 1046 (C.D. Cal. 2011). Successfully defended J&A Importers against a claim of copyright and trade dress infringement for noodle packaging. The court granted our summary judgment motion on all claims, because the plaintiff was unable to prove it possessed the IP rights it asserted. In addition, we obtained a substantial attorney fee award. The case subsequently settled while on appeal.Reshare v. Nikken, Case No. 10-CV-01936 JNE (D. Minn. 2011). Successfully negotiated a settlement of this patent infringement suit involving a computer-assisted selling system.Enagic v. Tseng, (C.D. Cal. 2010): Litigated a trademark infringement case for water ionizing machines on behalf of Enagic, based on defendant's use of client's mark in advertising. Case settled after discovery. Enagic USA v. Cabados (C.D. Cal. 2008): Litigated a trademark infringement case on behalf of Enagic. Case settled.MH Systems v. McNulty (C.D. Cal. 2010): Litigated a patent infringement case involving a ballast water treatment system. Court granted our client, McNulty, a judgment whereby the patent owner took nothing.International Seaway Trading v. Walgreen Co., 589 F. 3d. 1233 (Fed. Cir., 2009): The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals adopted our argument that the legal standard the Federal Circuit had used for over twenty-five years in determining whether a design patent is invalid must be overturned. As a result of this decision, d. You should contact other lawyers and law firms nearby before choosing your legal representatives.

If you are the owner or employee of Cislo & Thomas LLP, and want to update the information, please create a new account and then Claim & Edit Cislo & Thomas LLP. If you want to add your attorney firm, please create a new account.