Ryan Tyz

ATTORNEY | FOUNDER

Ryan Tyz is a trial lawyer and the founder of Tyz Law Group. He litigates high-stakes intellectual property and business disputes for technology companies and entrepreneurs. Ryan represents clients in the digital entertainment, software, cybersecurity and cloud computing industries with a focus on copyright, patent, trade secret, trademark, consumer class action, business and antitrust litigation.  

Ryan is consistently ranked as one of the Top Intellectual Property Lawyers in California by the Daily Journal (2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024), and was named an Elite Boutique Trailblazer by the National Law Journal (2020). 

Clients turn to Ryan for his tenacious advocacy, strong ability to grasp the facts and law, and strategic vision for achieving their objectives.

Prior to founding Tyz Law Group, Ryan spent a decade as a patent and IP litigator in Fenwick & West’s Silicon Valley office. While at Fenwick, Ryan represented technology clients in all phases of litigation, from pre-suit through appeal, including multiple trials.

Outside of work, Ryan is an outdoor enthusiast—from wake surfing Lake Tahoe to mountain biking in the Marin backcountry. He enjoys spending time with his wife, Jennifer, step-sons, Lachlan and Quinn, and dog, Indy.

LITIGATION HIGHLIGHTS

  • Winning a jury verdict of willful copyright infringement in the Northern District of California for the content creators of CoComelon, with the jury awarding damages totaling $23.4m, finding the infringing content virtually identical to CoComelon’s protectable JJ character and defendants violated Section 512(f) by making knowing and material misrepresentations in a counter notice to YouTube.

  • Winning a complete defense jury verdict in the Eastern District of Texas for a start-up co-founder in an $85.7 million trade secret misappropriation, CFAA, RICO and breach of contract case brought by tech-giant Huawei.

  • Winning a motion to compel arbitration for video game company, Scopely, Inc., in the District of New Jersey in a consumer unfair competition class action.

  • Obtaining a favorable settlement for leading cybersecurity vendor, CrowdStrike Inc., in a dual-front litigation involving copyright, trade secret, CFAA, false advertising, and antitrust claims.

  • Winning an arbitration award in excess of $2.5 million, including prejudgment interest and attorneys's fees, for a shareholder group in an M&A dispute involving search engine technology.

  • Winning a judgment of patent invalidity for a data management platform provider in the Southern District of New York and at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. 

REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS

  • Defendant video game company in consumer class action in N.D. Cal. over loot boxes.

  • Defendant video game company in copyright infringement lawsuit in D. Conn.

  • Plaintiff sensor technology company in breach of contract, conversion, and RICO action in N.D. Cal.

  • Defendant co-founder of SSD company in trade secret, contract, and CFAA action in E.D. Tex. (Complete Defense Jury Verdict)

  • Defendant cybersecurity company in antitrust litigation in N.D. Cal.

  • Defendant software platform provider in trade secret, trademark and breach of contract action in D. Nev.

  • Plaintiff cybersecurity company in copyright, trade secret, and CFAA litigation in D. Del. (Public Apology)

  • Defendant video game development studio in copyright litigation in D. Minn.

  • Defendant VoIP provider in patent litigation in D. Del.

  • Defendant video content platform provider in patent litigation in S.D.N.Y. (Fed. Cir. Affirms Win)

  • Plaintiff founder and tech investors in contract and fraud action.

  • Defendant clean technology company in trade secret misappropriation action in Santa Clara Superior Court.

  • Plaintiff Ad Tech company in contract action.

  • Defendant chip manufacturing software provider in copyright, trademark and antitrust action.

  • Defendant clean technology company in contract and tort litigation.

  • Defendant internet real estate company in defamation action.

  • Defendant productivity app developer in patent litigation.

  • J.D., University of Oregon School of Law - 2004, Editor Oregon Law Review

    M.A., International Institute for the Sociology of Law - 2001, Spain

    B.A., University of California, Santa Barbara - 1998, Law & Society

  • Member of the State Bar of California

    Admitted to all of the United States District Courts for the State of California

    Admitted to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

    Admitted to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Federal Circuit

Q&A WITH RYAN

  • I have been a litigator my entire career; trying cases is my passion. While I certainly had the opportunity to try cases while working in Big Law, I wanted much more – not only more trials, but more ownership of the direction and presentation of those cases from the outset, with a laser focus on winning. The idea to strike out on my own came naturally to me, but I wanted to build something very different than what was already out there. Before I founded Tyz Law Group, I didn't see any litigation-focused firms that offered a true alternative to the big law model. So, in the early days, I spent a lot of time exploring different ways to structure teams and to price legal work with the goal of building a lean team where we all share a single mission: to deliver results while providing excellent client service. Over the years, I have honed our model but certain key elements from those early days remain, including our commitment to always knowing the facts and the law better than our opponent, as well as our unique subscription model, which is an alternative to the billable hour model that both we and our clients love.

  • The way we approach clients and litigation matters is completely different. Without exception, we start by taking the time to deeply understand our clients’ business and their objectives, and having frank conversations about what is realistic, and what to expect. Once we are aligned on objectives, we embark on the process we refer to internally as “digging in,” where we gather and assess the facts and the law in a way that many lawyers don’t. As a result of this intensive approach, clients often tell us we know their technology and their business better than they do. This early investment in understanding the hand we’re dealt allows us to shape narratives that are both compelling and credible – something we all too often see our opponents fail to do. For us, at the end of the day, we are storytellers. We love to tell a good story better than anyone.

  • I'm very competitive in nature, I grew up playing sports and still do today. I look at litigation like a chess match. It requires strategy, so I call it an “old man” sport where you compete with your mind, not your body. Since my mind is better than my body these days, that's really what it is about for me. I love it. I love the adrenaline, the fast-paced environment of trial, getting up in front of a jury and in front of the judge, and using my creativity and hard work to position my clients in the best possible position to win. My team refers to me as fearless, and I think that’s mostly pretty accurate.

  • First and foremost, we solve problems. Clients come to us with very difficult problems, usually disputes, and they're complex. We listen, understand the problem, and then craft solutions that put us in the best place to get to resolution. Our attention to detail and precision guide the winning solution and our results speak for themselves.

  • I am proud of the team that we've built and the platform that we offer our attorneys. You’ll see that most of our team members are women. One of the problems I saw at Big Law was up or out, and that involves working thousands of hours with the hope of maybe eventually becoming a partner, or either being forced out or into a role that serves as a parking lot. For women who want to have children, they were often forced to pick, do I want to be a mother, or do I want to be a big law partner? That is a loss of talent, so I contemplated an alternative. At Tyz Law, it's all about flexibility, which is largely driven by the fact that we do not have a billable hour requirement and we work remotely. Our platform enables attorneys to both be a full-time parent and a full-time lawyer at our firm. I'm the proudest of that.

  • One of the reasons I started my own law firm is that I wanted to be a first chair trial lawyer. I will never forget sitting in a trial one day watching the senior partner do opening and closing, and thinking to myself, I want to do that. But in Big Law, I would have been second chair trial counsel for the next decade or so. Starting my own firm threw me into the fire, forcing me to grow, and I've been able to do that, again and again. I love it and I've gotten better at it and that's what I want to continue doing.

  • I am coming up on 10 years at my own firm after 10 years in Big Law. I learned a lot working in Big Law, but my progression at Tyz Law Group has been exponentially faster. By being a first chair trial lawyer, doing voir dire, presenting to a jury and being in front of a judge much more often, I’ve developed and honed those skills instead of hitting a wall or a ceiling working in Big Law. I have also learned more than I ever could have imagined though hiring, managing, and working with the best talent I could find, which is extraordinary.

  • Three attributes are not enough. But if forced to pick, I’d say tenacious, practical, and creative. We bring all of that to bear for our clients and that’s what allows us to deliver winning solutions.