News | May 8, 2026
A recent study by Tatyana Avilova, Economist at Secretariat has been selected by the Editor of JAMA Health Forum as an Editor’s Choice: Clinical Trial of 2025.
Carrie Distler provided expert reports and trial testimony on behalf of San Diego craft brewer Stone Brewing in a trademark infringement suit against the maker of Keystone Light, Molson Coors.
Ms. Distler, now a leading expert in Secretariat’s Intellectual Property practice1, provided expert damages analysis on behalf of plaintiff Stone Brewing and counsel BraunHagey and Borden LLP. Relying on Ms. Distler’s testimony, a Southern District of California jury awarded Stone Brewing $56 million in damages in 2022. Then, on December 30, 2024, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the $56 million jury award based on Ms. Distler’s testimony.
Stone’s lawsuit, filed in 2018, alleged that Molson Coors’ rebranding of Keystone Light to emphasize “Stone” in its packaging and marketing infringed on Stone Brewing’s trademark. At trial, Stone claimed damages for lost profits and corrective advertising. The eight-person jury agreed with Stone Brewing’s claims, awarding $56 million in damages.
Molson Coors appealed, arguing that future lost profits included in the $56 million verdict were speculative. The Ninth Circuit disagreed, ruling that “[t]he jury could reasonably rely on [Ms. Distler’s] calculation to determine that Stone Brewing’s sales would not recover immediately.”2 According to BraunHagey and Borden LLP, this is the fourth-largest trademark infringement verdict in U.S. history.3
Ms. Distler prepared multiple expert reports from 2018 through 2022 assessing the harm to Stone’s business from Molson Coors’ infringement. This included a deep dive into Stone’s operations to analyze the business’s performance as well as the performance of the industry and Stone’s peers. Working closely with the marketing expert for the theoretical underpinnings, Ms. Distler isolated the impact on Stone’s profits from the infringement. She also rebutted Molson Coors’ expert analysis that claimed Stone had experienced no harm.
“I am thrilled my analysis helped the court in this complex and significant case,” said Ms. Distler. “I am glad to have helped a small brewer quantify and recover the harm that it experienced from the misuse of its trademark by a large, global competitor.”
1 As of December 2023
2 Stone Brewing Co., LLC v. Molson Coors Beverage Company USA LLC, Case No. 23-3142 (9th Cir. Dec. 30, 2024)
3 Ninth Circuit Affirms $56 Million Jury Award for Stone Brewing