
InHouse Co. Law Firm Claim business
About
Based in Silicon Valley and Orange County, Inhouse Co. is a law firm specializing in litigation, estate planning, business transactions and intellectual property prosecution. We have over 25 years of experience and a proven track record of success in litigation and IP related matters. Our clients include corporations as well as business...... See More
Based in Silicon Valley and Orange County, Inhouse Co. is a law firm specializing in litigation, estate planning, business transactions and intellectual property prosecution. We have over 25 years of experience and a proven track record of success in litigation and IP related matters. Our clients include corporations as well as business minded individuals Most Recent Success Released: Sep 24, 2015 --- Jolly Technologies Inc wins employment lawsuit against terminated employee Jolly Technologies wins a hard fought wrongful termination lawsuit brought in bad faith by ex employee Kurt Bell Inhouse Co is proud to announce their successful defense of Jolly Technologies Inc. in a wrongful termination lawsuit brought by ex-employee Kurt Bell, who served as Vice President of Sales of Jolly Technologies for several years. Mr. Bell alleged that Jolly terminated him because he was disabled amongst several other accusations. Jolly maintained the position that the termination was due to a series of embezzlements conducted by the employee while working at Jolly. The litigation lasted for 3 years. Alexander Chen and Benjamin Hill from Inhouse Co Law represented Jolly in the dispute which was arbitrated by JAMS in San Francisco, CA. In the end, JAMS Judge Warren ruled against Mr. Bell, finding that some of the claims he brought, were brought in bad faith. Judge Warren also ruled that Mr. Bell misappropriated company funds and must return these funds back to Jolly. "When we consulted attorneys regarding our defense, they made it very clear that it is very difficult to win an employment lawsuit in California. Furthermore, achieving a ruling where the employee is found to have acted in bad faith is extremely rare. We feel vindicated to have received this ruling from Judge Warren," says Sandeep Jolly, CEO of Jolly Technologies. "I would like to thank Inhouse Co and the current and former Jolly employees that worked on our behalf for their hard work. I would also like to thank Judge Warren for reaching what I believe is a strong but very fair verdict." Below are notable litigation successes we obtained: Kalantari v. NITV, Inc., 352 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. Cal. 2003) A published opinion by the 9th Circuit Court. In an Appeal from the U.S. District Court,9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed District Court's summary judgement concerning Copyrights and embargo issued by President Clinton. Rexall sundown v. Mathias Rath A 5.5 week jury trial in Florida. Inhouse Co. obtained favorable jury verdict against major law firm GreenberfTraurig in a case concerning intellectual property royalties disputes. The original disputed amount exceeded $250 million dollars. Momento, Inc v. Seccion Amarilla USA A copyright and antitrust case in Nor.Cal.. Inhouse Co. obtained favorable settlement against major law firm Mayer Brown in a case reminiscent to David v.Goliath in which the defendant is owned by one of the weathliest man in the world, Carlos Slim. Mathias Rath v. Advance Biomedical Research A 7 day Aarbitration hearing in New York. Inhouse Co. obtained judgment in excess of $900,000 against against New York firm McElroy Deustsch Mulvaney & Carpenter in a case concerning clinical trial research dispute. Class action CLRA claims against VW, Chrysler and Nissan Dearlers Inhouse Co represents Volks Wagon, Chrysler and Nissan dealerships in defending various Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) class action claims. MAKS Broadcasting Inc., v. Kiumarz Lenahard Inc. et al. Prevailed at trial in defense of claim exceeding $2.5 million dollars in a landlord/tenant matter before Judge Terry Friedman is an author of TRG Landlord Tenant practice guide for lawyers. Tan Tee Tan v. U.S. Bank, et al. (October 2010) Successfully represented two co-defendants (J&J Seafoods, Inc.),in a two-phase trial, against a claim of conversion and punitive damages in a jury trial, which resulted in dismissal of both defendants. Chattery International Inc., v. Jolida, Inc., (March 2011) Successfully defeated Plaintiff�s Preliminary Injunction in the United States District Court The District of Maryland concerning trademark infringement which resulted in a published opinion by District Judge William D. Quarles, Jr. Modern Fence Technologies Inc. v. Qualipac Home Improvements Corp. (April 2011) Successfully represented defendant in The United States District Court Eastern District of Milwaukee concerning trademark infringement and antitrust matters in a jury trial, which resulted in full dismissal of the defendant and the invalidation of plaintiff�s trademarks (Reg. 291700 & Reg. 3337669). Vasquez v. Steven Creek Chrysler/Dodge (November 2011) Successfully represented defendant Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge dealer in a claim of fraud under Consumer Legal Remedies Act, in a trial in Santa Clara County Superior Court resulting in judgment in favor of our client. Davoodi v. Hoozad Inc. Successfully represented defendant in a preliminary injunction action regarding sale of corporate stock. CP6SV LLC, v. Zheng et al.(January 2012) Successfully represented defendant in a $500,000 breach of lease agreement action wherein favorable settlement was reached resulting the plaintiff dismissing the suit. Shi v. Massage Journey Inc. et al.(February 2012) Successfully represented defendants in a sexual harassment action wherein favorable settlement was reached shortly before jury trial. Lung Sheng Co. v. K2 Automotive Inc. et al.(March 2012) Successfully represented plaintiff in a patent infringement action wherein favorable settlement was reached with the defendants. WRI Golden State LLC v. Hoi Vo et al.(2012) Successfully defeating plaintiff's request for order of issuance of writ of attachment and obtaining a favorable result in the settlement for a breach of contract lease in the Superior Court of California Santa Clara County.(2012) Dixon Gas Club LLC v. Safeway et al. (2012) Successfully obtaining a preliminary injunction order against defendant Safeway in an anti-competition lawsuit in the Superior Court of California Alameda County. Attorney of record Ali Kamarei was interviewed by local TV stations regarding this victory. (2012) East Jordan Plastics v. Ainong USA (2012) Successfully represented defendant in defeating a trademark infringement preliminary injunction in the U.S. Central District Court of California. The trademarks in suit weer Reg. 1,587,878; Reg.2,555,659; Reg. 1,373,862 (2012) Asystech et al. v. Eagle Eyes Traffic Industry, ANZOUSA, and Keystone Automotive (2013) Asystech et al. v. Eagle Eyes Traffic Industry, ANZOUSA, and Keystone Automotive Successfully defended Eagle Eyes et al. in Eastern District of Wisconsin regarding allegations of infringement of five utility patents resulting amicable resolution to the matter. The patents in suit were 5,5653,548 Method and Apparatus For A Ball and Socket Joint; 5,07,133 Automobile Headlamp Adjuster; 6,913,374 Sliding Style Headlamp Adjuster; 6,979,109 Sliding Style Headlamp Adjuster, 7,264,376 Adjuster and Bracket Assembly. (2013) Lung Sheng Co. v. K2 Automotive Inc. et al.(March 2012) Successfully represented plaintiff in a patent infringement action wherein favorable settlement was reached with the defendants. Zaheri v. Estes Automotive Group II, Inc. et al., Case No. HG07360209(2013) Successfully obtained judgment in excess of $1.3 million against defendants in a judge trial for various causes of action concerning breach of contract.(2013) East Jordan Plastics v. Ainong USA (2013) Successfully represented defendant in reaching amicable resolution regarding trademark infringement allegation in the U.S. Central District Court of California. The trademarks in suit were Reg. 1,587,878; Reg.2,555,659; Reg. 1,373,862 (2013) Chattery International v. Jolida (2013) Successfully represented plaintiff in reaching amicable resolution regarding trademark infringement allegation in the U.S. District Court of Maryland and obtained recovery for client. The trademarks in suit were Reg. 3,134,802 and Reg. 3,209,962 (2013) Qi v. Lu et al. (2013) Successfully represented defendants in a breach of contract action and obtained a judgment in excess of $200,000 against plaintiff in Superior Court of California Orange County.(2013) Wong-Po v. Ghafari-Saravi, et al. (2013) Successfully represented plaintiff in construction defect case and obtained recovery for client in San Mateo County Superior Court (2013)
Services Offered
- Commercial Litigation
- Intellectual Property & Litigation
- Estate Planning
- Real Estate Law
- Cross Border Commercial Debt Collection
- Bankruptcy Law
- Corporation Matters
- Business Investment Immigration
Photos & Videos





Reviews
A Quick Look at Customer Sentiment
The reviews consistently praise the legal team for their exceptional expertise, diligent case handling, and transparent, client-focused service. Clients appreciate the proactive communication, ethical approach, and cost-effective solutions—whether it was resolving complex disputes, securing patents, or handling intellectual property issues—making the firm a reliable partner for diverse legal needs.
Deep Dive: Detailed Analysis of Customer Reviews
We’ve gathered and analyzed reviews from real customers across the web to give you an in-depth look at their experiences with InHouse Co. Law Firm. Here’s what people are saying about their service quality, professionalism, and reliability:
Overall Experience & Satisfaction
Clients express overwhelming satisfaction and relief after working with the firm. Many mention that the experience was transformative, with a sense of trust and gratitude toward the legal professionals who were dedicated to resolving their cases and providing personalized attention.
Service Quality & Expertise
The reviews highlight a high level of legal expertise, especially in business operations, patent matters, and copyright disputes. Clients commend the firm’s ability to research deeply, think strategically, and deliver precise advice. Specific mentions of Alexander Chen’s in-depth knowledge and Ali Kamarei’s proactive case management underscore the firm’s strength in providing quality legal guidance.
Customer Service & Communication
Communication is frequently lauded for being clear, concise, and responsive. Customers appreciate that the team communicates directly and effectively, ensuring they are informed throughout the process. The firm's willingness to tailor their approach—such as advising against unnecessary legal action—reflects a balanced and caring customer service ethos.
Value for Money & Pricing Transparency
Many reviews note the firm’s commitment to offering cost-effective solutions with transparent pricing. Clients have mentioned receiving reasonable fees and even discounts in challenging financial situations, which they found to be a refreshing contrast to other legal services that may overcharge for minor communications.
Timeliness & Efficiency
The legal team is recognized for its prompt and efficient handling of cases. Whether it was resolving disputes before going to trial or managing patent applications, clients were impressed by how quickly and effectively issues were resolved, saving both time and resources.
Professionalism & Trustworthiness
Reviewers frequently use terms like ethical, responsible, and professional to describe their experiences with the team. The lawyers are seen as trustworthy allies who prioritize the clients’ best interests, demonstrating unwavering commitment to justice and customized legal solutions.
Facility, Environment & Ambience
While few reviews directly comment on the physical environment, the overall impression of the office settings, particularly in Irvine and other locations, is positive. The ambiance conveys a sense of professionalism and accessibility, supporting the firm’s practical and approachable image.
Accessibility & Convenience
Clients have found it easy to reach and work with the team, with scheduling consultations and obtaining responses being highlighted as straightforward. The firm’s responsiveness and availability play a key role in fostering a stress-free experience during complex legal proceedings.
Problem Resolution & Follow-up
There is a strong consensus that the firm effectively resolves issues. Whether it involved writing compelling legal letters that spurred action or guiding clients through protracted legal disputes, the commitment to thorough follow-up and resolution is evident. Multiple success stories attest to the firm’s tenacity and reliable problem-solving approach.
Unique Strengths & Areas for Improvement
Unique strengths include the firm’s exceptionally strong interpersonal skills, ethical approach, and ability to deliver tailored, creative legal strategies. Specific employee recommendations and personal anecdotes lend authenticity to these reviews. While almost all feedback is highly positive, a few insights suggest that continuous improvement in response times and even broader availability might further enhance the client experience.
People Also Viewed

Motorcycle Accident Lawyer Guys
- Bike Repair
- Medical Bills

US IP Attorneys PC
- IP and internet litigation
- General litigation
Allegiance Law
- Personal Injury
- Automobile accidents
- Bicycle accidents
- See More

McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP
- Workers Compensation Law
- Patent Attorney
- Legal Services
- See More
-
Visit Website
-
View Phone Number
-
Get Directions South Almaden Avenue, San Jose, California
Working Hours
- Mon 09AM - 05PM
- Tue 09AM - 05PM
- Wed 09AM - 05PM
- Thu 09AM - 05PM
- Fri 09AM - 05PM
- Sat -
- Sun - Closed
Report a Problem for InHouse Co. Law Firm
Help us keep this listing accurate! If you notice incorrect details, report a problem below. Our team will review your submission.