Search Team

Search by Last Name

Fish Cases

Federal District Court

Fish Cases

Federal District Court

Back to Case Listing

Virginia E-Commerce Solutions, LLC v. eBay, Inc. and PayPal, Inc. (E.D. Va. 2010). Representing defendants eBay and PayPal in case relating to systems for and methods of conducting transnational e-commerce.

Spansion LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (E.D. Va. 2010). Representing Samsung defendants in case relating to methods of fabricating semiconductor memory devices.

W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., et al. (E.D. Va. 2010). Representing plaintiff W.L. Gore in case relating to intraluminal stent grafts.


BioElectronics Corp. v. 709702 BC Ltd. and Psaila (D. Md. 2010). Representing plaintiff BioElectronics in trademark infringement litigation in case related to Actipatch dermal patches.

Webmap Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. et al. (E.D. Tex. 2009). Represented defendant Microsoft in patent case related to web-based interactive mapping systems.  Case settled favorably.

Entrust, Inc. v. Corel Corp. (E.D. Va. 2006). Represented defendant Corel in software copyright infringement case. Obtained case dismissal.

Ford Motor Co. v. Paice LLC (E.D. Mich. 2006). Represented declaratory judgment defendant Paice LLC in case related to hybrid electric vehicles.  Successfully obtained case dismissal.

Repligen et al. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb (E.D. Tex. 2006). Represented plaintiffs Repligen and the Regents of the University of Michigan in case relating to treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Obtained highly favorable settlement.

American Calcar v. American Honda Motor Co., et al. (S.D. Cal. 2006). Representing Honda defendants in case relating to vehicle telematics. After obtaining case transfer from E.D. Tex., prevailed on summary judgment and at trial on 13 of 15 asserted patents. Case currently on appeal to Federal Circuit.

Saunders Group, Inc. v. ComforTrac and Care Rehab and Orthopaedic Products (E.D. Va. 2005). Lead counsel for defendants ComforTrac and Care Rehab and Orthopaedic Products in case relating to cervical traction devices. Obtained highly favorable settlement.

Paice LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp. et. al. (E.D. Tex. 2004, 2007). Represented plaintiff-patentee Paice LLC in cases related to control systems for hybrid electric vehicles. Obtained jury verdict of infringement and no invalidity, and a past damages award of over $ 5 million. In damages aspect of case remanded for additional proceedings related to ongoing royalty, jury’s per car royalty award was quadrupled.

International Trade Commission

In re Certain InkJet Ink Cartridges (U.S.I.T.C. 2010). Representing complainants Hewlett-Packard Co. and Hewlett-Packard Development Co. in Inv. No. 337-TA-723 related to thermal inkjet print cartridges.

In re Certain InkJet Ink Supplies (U.S.I.T.C. 2009). Representing complainants Hewlett-Packard Co. and Hewlett-Packard Development Co. in Inv. Nos. 337-TA-691 and 337-TA-730 related to thermal inkjet print components. Obtained default judgment; motion for general exclusion order pending.

In re Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles (U.S.I.T.C. 2009). Represented complainant Paice LLC against Toyota Motor Corp. et al. in Inv. No. 337-TA-688 related to high-voltage and low-current hybrid electric vehicle drive systems. Obtained highly favorable settlement on the eve of trial.

In re Certain Vein-Harvesting Surgical Systems (U.S.I.T.C. 2008). Represented Respondent Terumo in Inv. No. 337-TA-645 related to apparati for and methods of performing surgical procedures. Case settled favorably shortly before trial.

In re Certain Unified Communications Systems and Components Thereof (U.S.I.T.C. 2007). Represented respondent Microsoft Corp. in Inv. No. 337-TA-598 in case related to unified communications systems. Case settled favorably during Federal Circuit appeal.

In re Certain Flash Memory Devices and Components Thereof (U.S.I.T.C. 2005). Represented respondent Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. in Inv. No. 337-TA-552 in case related to flash memory devices. Final Determination of noninfringement of both asserted patents.

In re Certain Light-Emitting Diodes (U.S.I.T.C. 2004). Represented complainants OSRAM GmbH and OSRAM Opto Semiconductors GmbH in Inv. No. 337-TA-512 in case related to light-emitting diodes (LEDs). Obtained limited exclusion order prohibiting respondent Dominant Semiconductor from importing all accused LEDs into the United States.

In re Certain Display Controllers (U.S.I.T.C. 2003). Represented complainant Genesis Microchip, Inc. in Inv. No. 337-TA-491. Obtained limited exclusion order against all respondents.