Experience

Search Experience
  • Intellectual Property
  • Solar

e-Micro Corporation v. Google, Inc.

Defended Google against allegations that Google Checkout infringes a patent allegedly related to electronic payment transactions conducted on the Internet.

Cioffi, et al. v. Google Inc

Defended Google in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in a four-patent case relating to multi-process web browsers. The case is currently pending a post-trial invalidity decision based whether the reissue patents improperly recaptured disclaimed subject matter under 35 USC section 251.

Myriad v. Openwave Systems

Represented Myriad France, a French mobile-handset software company, in a dispute with Openwave Systems, an American software company, over ownership of 36 patents for such products as text messaging and mobile web browsing. After winning partial summary judgment, Myriad successfully negotiated an eight-figure settlement.

Zep Solar

Defended Zep Solar (which was later acquired by SolarCity) in patent infringement lawsuits filed in the International Trade Commission and the Northern District of California relating to efficient techniques for mounting solar panels. After obtaining early dismissal of Plaintiffs' claim for declaratory judgment of noninfringement because there was no subject matter jurisdiction, we sought a stay of the litigation pending an inter partes reexamination of the patent-in-suit in the Patent and Trademark Office. The asserted patents were invalidated virtually in their entirety, and the cases then settled.

Restricted Spending Solutions v. Allow Card

We won summary judgment of invalidity for our client Visa USA, Inc. in this patent action filed in Chicago asserting a patent over an "allowance" card for teens that can be controlled by the parent. This was a significant victory. Not only is a summary judgment of invalidity rare, but the well-known NPE Acacia was the ultimate owner of the plaintiff and had managed to exact settlements with many of the other eighteen defendants. 743 F. Supp. 2d 954 (N.D. Ill. 2010)(granting summary judgment).

Every Penny Counts, Inc. v. American Express Co., et al.

Defended Visa U.S.A. Inc. in a case where the plaintiff accused Visa’s gift card technology of infringing five patents. We prevailed on a case-dispositive claim construction at the district court, leading to a stipulated judgment of non-infringement on all five patents. The Federal Circuit upheld the claim construction and judgment on appeal. 563 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2009). A petition for en banc rehearing and petition for writ of certiorari were both denied.

3M Innovative Properties v. The Clorox Company

We represented Clorox, Brita, Pentair and Sears in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by 3M and its Cuno subsidiary in Minneapolis. The case involves two patents covering replacement water filters used in refrigerators. The court issued a favorable claims construction for Defendants in December 2007 as part of a ruling denying summary judgment. The case then settled on terms favorable to our clients.

Smith Barney

We act as regional counsel for Smith Barney in the San Francisco Bay Area and regularly provide advice, counseling, and act as litigation counsel for disputes arising out of the termination and hiring of broker-dealers, solicitation of clients and employees and the handling of confidential business and client information. In connection with this work, we are often called upon to handle proceedings seeking TRO’s and preliminary injunctive relief.

Ischemia Research and Educational Foundation v Pfizer, Inc., et al.

We defended Pfizer, Inc. against claims of trade secret misappropriation in Santa Clara County Superior Court.  The plaintiffs’ misappropriation claims arise out of clinical drug trials for Bextra, a second generation COX-2 inhibitor.

Chiron v. Hoffman-LaRoche

We represented Chiron Corporation as a plaintiff in this patent infringement action in the Northern District of California. The case involved the patent for a vaccine for the Hepatitis C virus, as well as antitrust counterclaims.

Ran One v. Principa

We represented Ran One in a copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation case brought against a former officer and director who attempted to create a competing company. The case settled favorably to Ran One.

Creo Products v. Dainippon Screen

Successfully defended Japanese manufacturer Dainippon Screen against patent infringement and trade secret claims brought in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement in our client's favor based on application of prosecution history estoppel, and summary judgment dismissing all other claims and an award for attorneys' fees in favor of our client. The district court judgment was affirmed in all respects by the Federal Circuit.

Dainippon Screen Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CFMT, Inc., et al.

This declaratory relief action requested a judgment of noninfringement and invalidity. We successfully appealed a jurisdiction dismissal (142 F.3d 1266))(reversing dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction and giving opponent a “Chutzpah Award”). After remand, the patentee counterclaimed on four patents involving semiconductor cleaning and drying technology used in state-of-the-art semiconductor fabrication equipment. We presented claim construction arguments at several Markman hearings. Following a month-long jury trial, this case was successfully settled.

Drexler Technology v. Dolby Laboratories, Inc., et al.

This case, filed in the Northern District of California, involved patent infringement claims asserting that Dolby Digital sound-on-film technology infringed patents held by the plaintiff, Drexler Technology Corporation.  In addition to defending Dolby Laboratories, also represented a number of major entertainment companies (including Walt Disney Pictures, Fox, MGM, Universal Studios and Columbia Pictures) in this action.  After obtaining a claim construction (“Markman”) order supporting virtually every claim construction position advocated on behalf of our clients, the Court entered summary judgment in the defendant's favor on grounds of non-infringement and patent invalidity.

B.C. Bones v. Battat

We represented B.C. Bones in a copyright infringement action relating to the design of three-dimensional dinosaur puzzles.  The case settled favorably to our client. 

Boldryev v. Frankel

We represented the original developer of WinAmp, the industry leading MP3 player, involving claims of fraud, copyright infringement, and partnership accounting by an alleged co-developer, following the sale of the company to AOL.  The case was successfully resolved.

CyberMedia v. Symantec, et al.

Represented an Atlanta-based software development company and its officers in connection with copyright and trade secret claims arising out of the development and sale of a popular software program.

Grills To Go v. W.C. Bradley Co.

Defended W.C. Bradley Co., a manufacturer of barbecue grills, in this trademark infringement action and have filed a cross-complaint against the plaintiff alleging our own Lanham Act claim.  The case was venued in the Eastern District of California.

Risk & Value Engineering v. Loan Performance

We represented Risk & Value Engineering in a copyright infringement / breach of licensing agreement action relating to interest rate process software used to simulate and analyze market risk in the mortgage industry. After negotiating a stipulated preliminary injunction preventing the defendant from using the software, we settled this action through mediation.

Walmart.com

Represented one of the nation’s most well-known online retailers as its outside intellectual property counsel, advising on matters ranging from compliance with regulatory regimes, licensing matters, “spam” statutes (such as CAN-SPAM), advertising issues, patent and trademark matters, and the impact of new developments in the “e-tail” space.

Wavelink Media v. Stoneground Solutions

Represented three former employees and their start-up website design company in litigation filed by their former employer (another website design company) based on claims of alleged misappropriation of trade secrets (including client lists, marketing strategies and website design techniques and styles), trademark infringement and copyright infringement. The case was settled favorably for our clients through mediation.