Litigation examples
Current
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor - Representing Power Integrations, Inc. as co-lead counsel in bringing a patent infringement suit in the District of Delaware. At issue are four Power Integrations patents relating to circuits and high voltage transistor structures asserted against various Fairchild chips used in power conversion applications. After trial, the jury found all four patents willfully infringed and awarded Power Integrations $34 million in damages. After a second trial, a second jury found all asserted claims not invalid. After a bench trial, the Court found Fairchild to have willfully infringed. Power Integrations’s request for attorneys’ fees and enhanced damages is pending.
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor and System General [PI v. Fairchild II] – Representing Power Integrations as co-lead counsel in asserting additional infringement claims against Fairchild and its subsidiary System General for their continued infringement of Power Integrations’ proprietary power supply controller technology.
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild and System General – Representing Power Integrations as co-lead counsel in the Northern District of California in asserting infringement claims related to Power Integrations’ prior successful suit in the U.S. ITC against System General.
Google adv. Northeastern University and Jarg, Inc. - Defending Google against claims for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas. Technology at issue relates to techniques for searching large, distributed databases.
SRI International, Inc. v. Symantec Corporation and Internet Security Systems, Inc. - Successfully represented SRI International as co-lead counsel in the District of Delaware in securing a jury verdict of infringement and patent validity against both defendants Symantec and ISS. Technology at issue relates to computer network intrusion detection. The case is currently on remand to address issues of damages and willful infringement against Symantec.
Carl Zeiss Meditec v. Optovue, Inc. – Representing Carl Zeiss Meditec as lead counsel in asserting patent infringement claims in the District of Delaware. Technology at issue relates to optical coherence tomography (OCT) equipment for imaging human eyes for medical applications.
Past
Honeywell, Inc. v. Sandel Avionics - Successfully represented Sandel as co-lead counsel in securing a jury verdict of non-infringement on all remaining claims asserted by Honeywell stemming from its original complaint filed against Sandel in 2002 asserting infringement of five Honeywell patents. Other of the asserted patent claims were previously held invalid on summary judgment and the invalidity findings were affirmed on appeal. The patents-in-suit relate to FAA mandated Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems ("TAWS").
Power Integrations adv. Intersil and Fairchild - Successfully represented Power Integrations as co-lead counsel in the District of Delaware in winning dismissal of all claims of patent infringement for lack of standing. The patents at issue relate to high-voltage transistor structures.
Power Integrations v. BCD Semiconductor - Represented Power Integrations as co-lead counsel in the District of Delaware asserting infringement by BCD of three Power Integrations patents. Technology at issue relates to power supply controller integrated circuits. This matter settled with the Defendant agreeing to a consent judgment against further infringement.
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. - Successfully represented Power Integrations, Inc. in a five patent case relating to various aspects of chips used in high-voltage AC-to-DC power conversion. Primarily responsible for preparation of damages case which, at trial, resulted in the jury awarding Power Integrations $32.3 million in damages which, at the time, was the largest patent damages awards in Delaware history.
In re Certain Power Supply Controllers and Products Containing Same - Successfully represented Power Integrations, Inc. as co-lead counsel in an investigation at the U.S. International Trade Commission concerning infringement of Power Integrations, Inc. patents by products of Respondent, System General Corporation of Taiwan. The ITC found infringement and entered an order excluding the accused products and certain downstream products incorporating them from the U.S. Successfully represented Power Integrations on appeal and secured a summary affirmance of the ITC decision.
Cadence et al adv. Bhandari and Vanguard - Successfully represented Cadence as co-lead counsel in defending against claims for patent infringement in D. Texas and N.D. Cal. Technology at issue relates to electronic design automation and verification tools. Secured summary judgment of non-infringement on declaratory judgment and dismissal of counterclaims.
Honeywell, Inc. v. Sandel Avionics, Inc. et al. (Sandel II) – Successfully represented Sandel as lead trial counsel in securing a jury verdict of noninfringement in a second case brought by Honeywell against Sandel in the District of Delaware. The patent at issue in this case was also related to Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems for aircraft but was directed to older technology concerning the pre-cursor "Ground Proximity Warning System." Honeywell asserted this patent against Sandel mid-way through the first lawsuit involving five other TAWS patents and the claim resulted in a follow-on suit.
ADE Corp. adv. KLA-Tencor, Corp. - Successfully represented ADE Corp. against KLA-Tencor's claims of patent infringement in District of Delaware. Technology at issue concerned semiconductor wafer inspection instruments and related data analysis software. Won a jury verdict that all asserted claims of KLA's remaining patent were invalid on multiple grounds. Succeeded in having claims to two other patents dismissed on summary judgment prior to trial and KLA-Tencor withdrew its claims on a fourth patent just prior to trial.
Google adv. NetJumper Software - Defending Google against claims for patent infringement brought in the Eastern District of Michigan. Technology at issue is related to user interface aspects of the Google toolbar. The case was administratively closed pending re-examination. The asserted claims currently stand rejected by the Patent and Trademark Office.
Apple Computer v. Articulate Systems, Inc. - Successfully represented Articulate Systems and Dragon Systems in defense of patent infringement claims brought by Apple. Prepared and argued summary judgment motions which resulted in Apple's claims based on four patents being dismissed, including having one patent declared invalid. Appeared on behalf of Articulate Systems and Dragon Systems in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and successfully defended against Apple's appeal.
SunPower v. SunLink - Represented SunPower as co-lead counsel in the Northern District of California in asserting infringement of two SunPower patents by SunLink. Technology at issue relates to lightweight structures for mounting arrays of solar panels on flat commercial rooftops with minimal or no roofing penetrations. This matter settled.
Thales Airborne Systems, et al. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp. – Represented Universal as lead counsel in defense of patent infringement claims brought by Thales in the District of Delaware. The two patents at issue in the case relate to Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems for aircraft. The matter settled.
PLS-Pacific Laser Systems v. TLZ, Inc. dba Toolz - Successfully represented Pacific Laser as lead counsel in asserting its patent for a multi-beam laser alignment tool. Case settled prior to trial with defendant taking a license and agreeing to redesign the accused product.
PLS-Pacific Laser Systems v. Robotoolz et al - Represented PLS as lead counsel in breach of contract and patent infringement suit in N.D. Cal. Technology at issue relates to laser alignment tools. The matter settled.
I-Flow Corp. v. Micor, Inc. - Represented Micor as lead counsel in defense of patent infringement claims brought by I-Flow in Central District of California. Technology of the case concerned catheters for the delivery of medication to surgical sites for post-operative treatment. The matter was settled successfully for Micor.