Kelly Hunsaker is a Principal in the firm’s Silicon Valley office with a national patent litigation and trial practice. With 17 years’ experience litigating high stakes cases, she has been recognized as one of the Daily Journal’s Top Litigators in California, one of California’s Super Lawyers in each of the last seven years, and earlier in her career as one of the nation’s Top New Stars by LawDragon magazine.
Ms. Hunsaker leads patent litigation involving a wide range of technologies, especially in the fields of computer software and hardware, consumer electronics and Internet technologies. Her experience in these fields include patent cases involving various operating system and application software, Internet applications and infrastructure, digital media players, digital rights management (DRM), computer graphics, network security and encryption technologies, financial services software, web site development tools, customer relationship management (CRM) tools, database technologies, LCDs and displays, microprocessors and mobile phones. Ms. Hunsaker has also litigated patent cases involving a variety of other technologies, including optical systems and laser technologies, mechanical devices, methods of manufacturing, material sciences, pharmaceutical sciences, and sporting goods. She has experience in other areas of commercial litigation, as well as trademark, trade secret, copyright, and technology licensing disputes. Ms. Hunsaker’s practice includes client counseling on IP strategy and a variety of other matters, pre-suit investigations, due diligence, and opinion work, as well as re-examinations and patent interferences. She handles all aspects of trial, pre-trial and appellate proceedings.
Ms. Hunsaker currently works with firm management on strategic initiatives to answer the industry’s call for increased value in legal services; and previously served as Head of Business Development for the firm’s global litigation practice group. Ms. Hunsaker was the firm’s first National Chair of Firmwide Diversity (2004-2006), during which time Fish & Richardson launched its 1L Diversity Fellowship program, became the first Platinum law firm sponsor of the American Intellectual Property Law Education Foundation (AIPLEF), and received recognition as on one of the Top 100 Law Firms for promoting diversity in the legal profession.
Juxtacomm Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation (E.D. Tx.) – Led defense team for Microsoft in patent litigation filed against 22 defendants in Eastern District of Texas involving database technology.
Data Encryption Corporation (an Acacia entity) v. Microsoft Corporation (C.D. Cal.) – Led defense team for Microsoft in patent infringement case involving Windows file encryption technology, winning summary judgment of non-infringement and making the winning argument on appeal before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
TV Interactive Data v. Microsoft Corporation (N.D. Cal.) – Led defense team for Microsoft in four-patent litigation involving Windows operating system and device driver technology. Settled favorably.
Block Financial Corporation v. Yodlee, Inc. (W.D. Mo.) – Won summary judgment of noninfringement for defendant Yodlee, Inc. in patent litigation involving account aggregation software, distributed object technology and Internet applications.
Macromedia, Inc. v. Adobe Systems, Inc. (D. Del.) – Defended Adobe in patent litigation involving computer software for the creation and editing of web sites. Resolved favorably.
Zone Labs v. Sygate Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) – Defended Sygate in patent litigation involving computer network security software and systems. Resolved favorably.
Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG v. Adobe Systems, Inc. (D. Del.) – Defended Adobe in patent litigation involving computer graphics software and electronic photo retouching. Resolved favorably.
Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories v. Kana Communications (D. Del.) – Represented plaintiff Genesys in patent litigation involving email routing software. Resolved favorably.
Air Measurement Technologies, Inc. and North-South Corporation v. Bacou USA Safety, Inc. – Defended Bacou USA Safety in patent litigation involving industrial safety equipment for firefighters. Settled favorably. <
In the Matter of Certain Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof (ITC) – Represented Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. and StarSight Telecast, Inc. in multi-patent ITC proceedings involving interactive programming guides.
The Burton Corporation v. Vans, Inc., Switch Manufacturing, Inc. – Defended Vans, Inc. and Switch Manufacturing against Burton Snowboards in patent litigation involving snowboard equipment. Resolved favorably.
Supracor Systems, Inc. v Reebok International (N.D. Cal.) – Led case filed by plaintiff Supracor in technology licensing dispute involving athletic footwear and patented process for manufacturing thermoplastic elastomeric honeycomb, recovering $18.75 million in damages.
PLS – Pacific Laser Systems v. TLZ, dba Toolz, Inc. – Represented plaintiff Pacific Laser in patent litigation involving laser alignment device. Resolved favorably, including redesign of the accused product.
Trademark, Trade Secret and Copyright Litigation
Lifetime Software Technologies, Inc. v. Time, Inc. – Represented plaintiff Lifetime Software in Internet domain name and trademark dispute. Resolved favorably.
Siegel Electronics v. Ardco Electronics – Defended Ardco Electronics against Siegel Electronics in trade secret and copyright dispute. Resolved favorably.
Wildflour v. Sunflour – Defended Sunflour against Wildflour in trademark dispute. Resolved favorably.
J&D Properties v. Massachusetts Bay Insurance Co. – Represented defendant in breach of contract and insurance bad faith case. Tried four-week jury trial with successful outcome for the defendant.
Potter v. Guaranty National Insurance Company – Argued appeal before the Nevada Supreme Court. Successfully obtained reversal of multi-million punitive damages award.
Polaris Investment Management Corp. v. Avemco Insurance Company – Represented defendant in $15 million breach of contract and insurance bad faith case. Won summary judgment for defendant.