Level Sleep v. Sleep Number
Representing Level Sleep against Sleep Number in this competitor case concerning infringement of multiple patents relating to mattress technology.
BladeRoom v. Facebook and Emerson
After a five-week jury trial before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, our team won for UK-based BladeRoom a $30 million verdict against global manufacturing giant Emerson for willful and malicious misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of a non-disclosure agreement relating to BladeRoom’s revolutionary new methodology for constructing warehouse-sized data centers. The Daily Journal named this one of the “Top Verdicts” in California in 2018. The Court subsequently awarded BladeRoom an additional $30 million in exemplary damages and $17 million in prejudgment interest, for a total judgement exceeding $77 million. Our client settled with Facebook after the first week of trial.
Bench Trial Defense Verdict in Napa County
After a week-long bench trial in Napa County Superior Court, our team won a complete defense verdict on behalf of one of the largest wine grape growers in Napa County, whose family businesses and trusts had been joined to a marital dissolution proceeding. The opponent had sought damages in the millions of dollars and equitable relief, but our client prevailed on all claims. The court awarded our client $75,000 in sanctions for the opponent’s unreasonable litigation conduct.
BioMarin v. Shionogi
Represented Shionogi against claims brought by BioMarin in San Francisco Superior Court for breach of a pharmaceutical license agreement.
Confidential AAA Arbitration
After a three-week arbitration hearing, our trial team won a $4 million-plus arbitration award on behalf of a small technology startup against a multinational corporation for breach of a nanotechnology development agreement.
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).
SoftView v. Dell
Defended Dell against software patent infringement claims brought by SoftView against Dell’s Android phones and tablets in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case was dismissed after all of SoftView’s asserted claims were found unpatentable in inter partes review.
Soladigm (View) v. Tarng
Represented Soladigm (now View, Inc.) against former consultant for breach of a consulting and nondisclosure agreement relating to electrochromic glass technology in United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case settled favorably, with the court subsequently enforcing the settlement agreement over the objection of the consultant who wanted to unwind the agreement.
UC Regents v. QD Vision
Represented the Regents of the University of California against QD Vision for infringement of patents relating to nanocrystal technology in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Round Rock Research v. Dell Inc.
Defended Dell in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of Texas and the District of Delaware against allegations that its products infringed 20 patents across a wide range of technologies involving DRAM, server management and monitoring, and BIOS.