Experience
Profectus Technologies v. Google LLC
Represented Google LLC in its complete defense verdict from a Texas federal jury in the Western District of Texas in a case alleging that Google's Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max devices infringed a patent asserted by Profectus Technologies. The jury found that the asserted claims of the patent were invalid and that Google did not infringe.
Networking and Cybersecurity Solutions Company Patent Infringement Lawsuit
Represented a multinational networking and cybersecurity solutions company in a 6-patent infringement lawsuit in the Western District of Texas and in the related IPR proceedings. The lawsuit accused a broad range of data center-related technology, including routers, switches, firewall devices, and the company’s operating system of infringement. The matter resolved with a settlement favorable for our client.
Security People, Inc. v. Ojmar US, LLC
Defended Spanish touch-pad lock manufacturer Ojmar SA and its US subsidiary in a series of patent infringement actions filed by its direct competitor in the Northern District of California. We succeeded in getting two cases dismissed outright and defeated the third by successfully challenging the asserted patent in an IPR proceeding in the Patent Office—a decision summarily affirmed by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. We then filed a Walker Process/Handgards antitrust case on behalf of Ojmar against its dominant competitor. That case settled the week before trial in June 2018.
Blue Spike v. Adobe Systems
Defended Adobe Systems in a five-patent case relating to signal abstraction technology involving 70+ defendants. We successfully obtained a transfer of venue from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California followed by a judgment of non-infringement. Argued appeal before Federal Circuit seeking recovery of attorney's fees.
Comcast v. Promptu Systems
In response to patent litigation against Comcast, we have filed six IPR petitions challenging the three asserted patents. All six IPRs have been instituted for review on all grounds by the Patent Office. Final decisions will issue in mid-2019.
Goodson v. Titeflex Corp.
In response to patent litigation against Titeflex, we defended the district court litigation and successfully obtained a stay based on two IPR petitions. We prevailed on all claims in both IPRs, and the PTAB’s decision cancelling all of the challenged claims was summarily affirmed by the Federal Circuit (two days after the oral argument).
EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. Landis+Gyr Inc., et al.
Defended Trilliant Inc. in this three-patent case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against smart meter vendors involving wireless mesh network technology. Case ended by settlement for Trilliant though another defendant went to trial and suffered a significant loss (eventually overturned by Federal Circuit).
Rotatable Technologies v. Motorola Mobility LLC and Quickoffice Inc.
Obtained a non-infringement judgment for defendants Motorola Mobility and Quickoffice Inc. on 47 mobile devices in a patent case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Judgment was upheld on appeal.