Tracy O. Zinsou 

Tracy O. Zinsou handles complex litigation for BraunHagey, especially class action defense cases. She says that in its 14 years of existence, the firm has never allowed a putative class action to be certified.

Zinsou, who joined the firm in 2020 and was made a partner in December, has carried on that tradition. Last summer, she knocked out a class action that had attacked Bodyarmor sports drinks for not providing “superior hydration” and for containing sugar. Silver v. BA Sports Nutrition LLC, 3:20-cv-00633 (N.D. Cal., filed Jan. 28, 2020).

But when Zinsou deposed the named plaintiffs, “both of them effectively admitted that they never actually relied on any of these [claims on the label] when purchasing the product,” she said. “And neither of them even knew what superior hydration meant.”

The judge granted a motion for summary judgment, “and at that point, roughly 80% of the case was gutted,” Zinsou said. It quickly settled.

She and the firm also pointed to shaky named plaintiffs to defeat a pair of putative class actions against a teeth-whitening device company. In the first case, the plaintiff admitted in deposition that he hadn’t purchased the product until after the plaintiffs’ attorneys had drafted the complaint and sent it to the company with a demand letter. Kraus v. Snow Teeth Whitening LLC, 2:20-cv-06085 (E.D. N.Y., filed Dec. 14, 2020).

When the BraunHagey team filed a motion to dismiss that case, the plaintiffs’ attorneys “kind of saw the writing on the wall,” Zinsou said and quickly filed a new case with four new plaintiffs recruited from class action websites. She moved to dismiss that case last fall, and on Sept. 14 this year, the district judge adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant the bulk of her motion. Poyer v. Snow Teeth Whitening LLC, 2:22-cv-01506 (E.D.N.Y filed March 18, 2022).

In a very different sort of case, she and the firm are representing a plaintiff suing an artificial intelligence company to prevent it from using Californians’ facial images to create a massive database that could be used for domestic espionage.

Last fall, Zinsou argued against the AI company’s anti-SLAPP motion and demurrer. Judge Evelio Grillo ruled for her client in mid-November, and the company has appealed. Renderos v. Clearview AI Inc., A167179 (Cal. App. 1st Dist., filed Dec. 7, 2022).

In addition to handling litigation, Zinsou has taken on some leadership roles at her firm. She oversees the 15 paralegals who work in its San Francisco and New York offices, which includes managing their workflow, training and recruiting.

She also oversees the firm’s summer associates program, now just in its second year. Last year, one law student worked at the firm. “This year, we had a little bit more of a structured summer program, which I thought went really well,” she said.

— Don DeBenedictis