Intellectual Property Litigation
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LITIGATION
Our IP Litigation team leverages deep technical and legal experience to help clients protect their innovations and maintain their competitive advantage.
The number of patent litigation cases continues to rise. There’s been a big increase in recent years in the number of cases filed by non-practicing entities. And, with the rise of social media, companies are increasingly concerned about their ability to protect their trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. In light of these trends, companies are more motivated than ever to safeguard their intellectual property.
Our clients operate in a fiercely competitive marketplace. We help them stay two steps ahead of the competition while vigorously protecting their business interests.
In the high stakes world of intellectual property litigation, where the technology at issue can be intricate and complex, we understand that communication with the judge, jury, or other neutral arbiter is critical. Our attorneys excel at communicating complicated concepts of fact and law in a clear and persuasive manner. We’re at the forefront of counseling and litigating cases, and devising innovative legal strategies to help our clients protect their intellectual property and further their competitive advantage.
Who we work with
- High tech companies
- Life sciences companies
- Financial institutions
- Manufacturers spanning a wide variety of industries
Representative Patent Litigation Matters
- Kenexa BrassRing Inc. v. Taleo Corp. and Vurv Technology, Inc. (D. Del.) After two days of jury trial in federal court, our team of IP litigators settled a case for recruiting software maker Taleo Corporation in a patent infringement case brought by Kenexa, its main competitor. Because the trial dealt exclusively with invalidity, Taleo was effectively the plaintiff and went first. The case settled and the confidential terms of the settlement are global, resolving seven different actions between Taleo and Kenexa; we also won an appeal of an inter partes reexamination before the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Board of Patent Appeals with respect to one of the patents.
- Geotag v. Frontier Communications (E.D. Tex.) Currently representing 29 defendants in this matter in which 450 defendants were accused of patent infringement by a non-practicing entity. Our clients are among the world’s leading consumer brands. IP Law 360 has referred to this case as “the largest current patent troll litigation.”
- Tierra Telecom, Inc. v. Level 3 Communications (W.D.N.Y.) Represented Level 3 Communications, et al in patent infringement case involving VoIP. Successfully transferred case from E.D. Virginia to W.D.N.Y. Settled the case on very favorable terms.
- Cummins-Allison Corp v. Shinwoo Information and Telecommunications Co., Ltd., (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) Represented the plaintiff in a patent infringement case accusing SBM and Amro of infringing a Cummins-Allison patent. Successfully proved infringement and Cummins-Allison was awarded $12 million in lost profit damages from the defendant SBM and Amro and an additional $970,000 in prejudgment interest – as well as a permanent injunction preventing future sales, importation, and marketing of the infringing products in the United States. Cummins cross-appealed a finding of invalidity of one of its patents. Appellate court upheld lower court's ruling against defendants and reversed one of the lower court’s invalidity rulings, finding instead in favor of Cummins-Allison.
- DNT LLC v. Sprint Spectrum, LP et al. (E.D. Va.) Achieved a complete defense victory for our client Sierra Wireless and its 3G wireless network customer. Following a ten day trial, the eight jurors returned a unanimous verdict of patent non-infringement and invalidity confirming all of the asserted defenses.
- Represented the plaintiff, a well-known medical device company, in a patent infringement matter related to medical devices used in surgical procedures. Obtained a jury verdict in favor of our client and the patents in suit were found to be valid and infringed. Client was awarded damages including a 16% royalty.
Representative Trademark Litigation Matters
- Fashion Institute of Technology v. FIT Market Corp. (S.D.N.Y.) Obtained favorable settlement in trademark infringement matter on behalf of our client, Fashion Institute of Technology.
- Ford Motor Company v. O’Brien Parts, Inc., d/b/a Shamrock Parts, and Richard P. O’Brien, Jr. (D. Mass.) Obtained an ex parte seizure order of counterfeit goods resulting in an entry of a stipulated permanent injunction on behalf of plaintiff.
- Carefirst of Maryland, Inc. v. First Care, P.C. (E.D. Va.) Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement on behalf of First Care. Successfully represented First Care on appeal affirming district court’s summary judgment decision.
- Ciphertrust, Inc. v. Trusecure (Cybertrust) (E.D. Va.) Represented Cybertrust, one of the world’s largest IT security companies, in trademark action brought by CipherTrust. Obtained judgment of non-infringement following trial.
- CSC Brands, LP and Campbell Soup Company v. National Harvest Food Group LLC (D. Del.) Represented defendants after plaintiffs filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a ruling of non-infringement with respect to their line of FULLY LOADED Campbell Soup products. In response, we filed a counterclaim for trademark infringement and unfair competition. Case settled favorably for our client.
Representative Copyright Litigation Matters
- Biscotti, Inc. v. Target Corporation (N.D. Cal.) Represented Biscotti in a copyright infringement suit involving the design on fabric used to make children's swim wear. Case settled.
- Wolk v. Kodak Imaging Network, Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.) Achieved a summary judgment victory for our clients, Kodak Imaging Network, Inc. and Eastman Kodak Co. in copyright infringement matter. Currently representing the defendants on appeal.
- Pinnacle Pizza Co. v. Little Caesar Enterprises (D.S.D.) Obtained summary judgment in favor of pizza franchisor Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. in a copyright and trademark infringement dispute. Successfully represented Little Caesar Enterprises on appeal affirming the district court's decision.
- Nearstar, Inc. v. Waggoner, et al. (E.D. Tex.) Represented defendant ASE Technologies in a copyright infringement matter involving allegations of trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, tortious interference, and civil conspiracy related to a document management system. Case settled.
- Nautilus Standard Used by CAFC to Overturn Pre-Nautilus Patent Indefiniteness Judgment
BNA's Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal | March 11, 2015
Silicon Valley IP Litigation partner Shawn Hansen and Chicago IP Counseling & Transactions partner Paul Kitch discuss the Federal Circuit’s precedential opinion reversing a district court's judgment of patent claim invalidity for indefiniteness since the Supreme Court's Nautilus decision.
- Growing Potential for P3 Infrastructure Development in Cuba
Law360 | January 30, 2015
Washington, DC, Commercial Litigation and Government Contracts partner Vince Napoleon and Washington, DC, IP Litigation staff attorney Diana Vilmenay authored this column on the potential impacts of new developments in U.S./Cuba relations on Cuban infrastructure growth.
- Lawyers Weigh in on High Court Claim Construction Ruling
Law360 | January 20, 2015
Silicon Valley IP Litigation partner Shawn Hansen and Chicago IP Counseling & Transactions partner Paul Kitch discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to cast aside the Federal Circuit's long-standing rule that all district court claim construction rulings must be reviewed anew on appeal.