Universal Golf Club Shaft and Golf Club Head Connection Adaptors, Inv. No. 337-TA-1320 (Club-Conex v. Top Golf Equipment). Representing complainant Club-Conex asserting patent infringement.
Electronic Devices and Semiconductor Devices with Timing-Aware Dummy Fill, Inv. No. 337-TA-1319 (Bell Semiconductor v. AMD, Acer, et al.). Representing respondents AMD and Acer against allegations of patent infringement.
Electrical Connectors and Cages, Inv. No. 337-TA-1241 (Amphenol v. Luxshare). Representing complainant Amphenol asserting patent infringement. Obtained a finding of violation before the Administrative Law Judge.
Active Optical Cables, Inv. No. 337-TA-1233 (Cosemi v. EverPro, Facebook, and Logitech). Represented respondent Facebook against allegations of patent infringement. Complainants withdrew the complaint on the eve of trial.
Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-1228 (AutoStore v. Ocado and Tharsus). Representing respondents Ocado and Tharsus against allegations of patent infringement. Obtained a no violation finding before the Administrative Law Judge and at the Commission. The Commission’s determination is pending appeal at the Federal Circuit.
Filament Light-Emitting Diodes, Inv. Nos. 337-TA-1172, -1220 (Regents of the University of California v. GE, IKEA, Satco, Home Depot, et al.). Representing respondent IKEA in multiple investigations against allegations of patent infringement. Complainants withdrew the 1172 complaint, and IKEA prevailed in full before the Commission in 1220.
Botulinum Toxin Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-1145 (Allergan and Medytox v. Daewoong and Evolus). Represented respondent Daewoong against allegations of trade secret misappropriation before the Commission and at the Federal Circuit. The Commission Opinion was vacated by the Federal Circuit and the dispute concluded shortly thereafter.
Cartridges for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-1141 (Juul Labs v. Maduro, et al.). Represented respondent Maduro against allegations of patent infringement. Investigation terminated as to Maduro during the evidentiary hearing due to settlement.
Blood Cholesterol Testing Strips, Inv. No. 337-TA-1116 (Polymer Technology Systems vs. ACON). Represented complainant PTS asserting patent infringement. Obtained limited exclusion orders and cease and desist orders against ACON on all asserted patents.
Modular LED Display Panels, Inv. No. 337-TA-1114 (Ultravision v. Lighthouse, Panasonic, et. al.) Representing the Lighthouse and Panasonic respondents against allegations of patent infringement. Investigation terminated as to our clients due to a standstill agreement.
Radio Frequency Micro-Needle Dermatological Treatment Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1112 (Syneron v. Lutronic, et. al.). Represented the Lutronic respondents against allegations of patent infringement. The investigation settled during the discovery phase.
Ink Toner Cartridges, Inv. No. 337-TA-1106 (Canon v. Aster Graphics, et al.). Represented the Aster respondents. The Commission affirmed the ALJ’s decisions granting summary determination of non-infringement, found no violation, and terminated the investigation.
Solid State Storage Drives, Inv. No. 337-TA-1097 (BiTMICRO v. Lenovo, et. al.). Represented the Lenovo respondents against allegations of patent infringement. The investigation settled just prior to the hearing.
Digital Television Set-Top Boxes, Inv. No. 337-TA-1041 (OpenTV, et al. v. Comcast, ARRIS, et al.). Represented the Comcast respondents against allegations of patent infringement. Complainants withdrew the complaint and investigation was terminated during discovery phase.
Cell Phone Holder for Vehicles, Inv. No. 337-TA-1028 (Nite Ize v. numerous respondents). Represented complainant Nite Ize in an investigation alleging patent infringement. The Commission issued a General Exclusion Order and Limited Exclusion Orders against multiple respondents.
Magnetic Data Storage Tapes, No. 337-TA-1012 (Fujifilm v. Sony). Magnetic Tape Cartridges, Inv. No. 337-TA-1036 (Sony v. Fujifilm). Magnetic Tape Cartridges, Inv. No. 337-TA-1058 (Sony v. Fujifilm). Magnetic Tape Cartridges, Inv. No. 337-TA-1076 (Fujifilm v. Sony). Represented Sony in a series of investigations and counter-investigations involving allegations of patent infringement in violation, modification, and enforcement proceedings before the Commission and before Customs. The global dispute settled during the pendency of the enforcement proceeding.
Semiconductor Devices, No. 337-TA-1010 (Tessera v. Broadcom, et al.). Represented respondents against allegations of patent infringement. The investigation settled following a determination of no violation as to one asserted patent but before a Commission decision on review as to the other two asserted patents.
Carbon and Alloy Steel, No. 337-TA-1002 (U.S. Steel Corp. against the Chinese Steel Industry). Represented respondent Masteel Group against allegations of antitrust violations and false designation of origin. The Commission found no violation under both allegations.
Portable Electronic Devices, No. 337-TA-994 (Creative Technology v. Sony, et al.). Represented respondent Sony against allegations of patent infringement. Obtained 100-day hearing and invalidated the asserted patent under §101. The Federal Circuit affirmed.
Mobile Electronic Devices Incorporating Haptics, and Inv. No. 337-TA-1004 and Inv. No. 337-TA-990 (Consolidated) (Immersion v. Apple, AT&T). Represented complainant Immersion in a consolidated investigation alleging patent infringement. The investigation settled after the hearing.
Automatic Teller Machines, Inv. No. 337-TA-958 (Global Cash Access v. NRT Technology Corp.). Represented respondent NRT against allegations of patent infringement. Obtained favorable Markman ruling finding claim term indefinite and successfully invalidated the patent on summary determination. Complainant then withdrew the Complaint.
Recombinant Factor VIII Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-956 (Baxter v. Novo Nordisk). Represented respondent Novo Nordisk against claims of patent infringement. The investigation settled.
Footwear Products, No. 337-TA-936 (Converse, Inc. v. New Balance, Walmart, Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Zulily, Inc., et al.). Represented Skechers and Zulily against charges of trademark infringement and unfair competition before the Commission and the Federal Circuit. Obtained a no violation finding by the Commission after a remand from the Federal Circuit.
Personal Transporters, No. 337-TA-935 (Segway and Deka Products v. multiple respondents). Successfully represented complainants Segway and Deka, alleging infringement of utility patents, design patent, and copyrights. Obtained a General Exclusion Order and Limited Exclusion Orders against multiple respondents.
Hemostatic Products, No. 337-TA-913 (Baxter v. J&J, Ethicon, Ferrosan and PCI). Represented respondent Ferrosan in allegations of patent infringement on a medical device manufactured by Ferrosan and sold by Ethicon in the United States. The investigation was settled.
Antivenom Compositions, Inv. No. 337-TA-903, (BTG v. Veteria Laboratories, BioVeteria Life Sciences, LLC, Laboratorios Silanes,Instituto Bioclon S.A. de C.V. and Rare Disease Therapeutics, Inc.). Represented complainant BTG in charges of patent infringement against respondents producing an antidote to snakebites. The investigation settled.
Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices, No. 337-TA-892, (Straight Path IP Group v. Sony, et al.). Represented several Sony entities against claims of patent infringement involving the Sony PlayStation, television sets, smartphones, and other electronic devices. The parties settled on the eve of trial.
TV Programs, Inv. No. 337-TA-886, (E.T. Radcliffe, LLC and Emir Tiar v. The Walt Disney Company and Thunderbird Films). Successfully represented The Walt Disney Company against charges of copyright infringement related to the Young television show. Won on summary determination of no copyright infringement.
Integrated Circuit Chips, No. 337-TA-859 (Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp. and Seagate Technology). Successfully represented LSI/Seagate in Section 337 investigation alleging patent infringement involving integrated circuits. The Commission found no violation and no domestic industry.
Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, No. 337-TA-855 (Hitachi Metals, Ltd., Japan and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd., v. Beats Electronics, LLC, et al.). Successfully represented respondent Beats—Hitachi withdrew the complaint, which resulted in the termination of Beats from the investigation.
Food Waste Disposers, No. 337-TA-838 (Emerson Electric v. Anaheim Manufacturing). Successfully represented Anaheim as a respondent against allegations of multiple unfair acts, including trade dress. Complainant withdrew its complaint after the pre-hearing conference.
Audiovisual Components, No. 337-TA-837 (LSI Corp. v. Funai Electric Co., MediaTek, Realtek Semiconductor, et al.). Represented LSI/Agere against Funai and Realtek concerning audiovisual products and semiconductor chips.
Electronic Devices for Capturing and Transmitting Images, No. 337-TA-831 (Kodak v. HTC Corp., HTC America, Inc. and Apple). Successfully represented HTC in patent dispute with Kodak.
Video Displays and Products Using and Containing Same, No. 337-TA-828 (Mondis Technology Ltd. v. Chimei Innolux Corporation and Innolux Corp.). Successfully represented complainant Mondis. The parties settled the ITC investigation and related district court and foreign litigation based on a payment of royalties to Mondis.
Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-753 (Rambus v. LSI Corp., et al). Represented respondents LSI and Seagate against allegations of multi-patent infringement.
Mobile Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-750 (Apple v. Motorola). Represented respondent Motorola.
Liquid Crystal Display Devices, Including Monitors, Televisions, and Modules, and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA- 741/749 (Thomson Licensing SAS v. MStar Semiconductor, Inc., et al). Represented MStar, a manufacturer of controller chips used in display monitors, against claims of patent infringement.
Automated Media Library Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-746 (Overland Storage v. BDT, IBM and Dell). Represented the BDT respondents in a patent-based Section 337 investigation.
Wireless Communication Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-745 (Motorola v. Apple). Represented complainant Motorola.
Underground Cable and Pipe Locators, Inv. No. 337-TA-727 (Radiodetection, Ltd. Vivax-Metrotech Corp. and Leidi Supply Ltd.) Successfully represented respondents Vivax-Metrotech and Leidi.
Personal Data and Mobile Communication Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-710 (Apple and NeXT v. HTC and Nokia). Represented respondent HTC.
DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-698, (Richtek Technology v. Advanced Micro Devices, uPI Semiconductor et al.). Represented respondents MSI Corp., Micro-Star International, and uPI against allegations of patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation. Represented uPI in enforcement proceedings.
Bulk Welding Wire Containers and Components Thereof and Welding Wire, Inv. No. 337-TA-686 (Lincoln Global v. Kiswel Ltd., et al). Represented respondent Kiswel Ltd.
Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size, 337-TA- 605 and 337-TA-649 (Tessera v. ATI Technologies, et al.). Represented complainant Tessera.
Sucralose, No. 337-TA-604 (Tate & Lyle v. various foreign companies). Represented complainant Tate & Lyle.
Unified Communication Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-598 (Microsoft v. Alcatel Lucent). Represented respondent Alcatel.
Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-565 (Seiko Epson Corp. Ninestar Technologies, et al.). Represented complainant Seiko Epson and its related entities.
Flash Memory Devices, 337-TA-552 (Toshiba v. Hynix), NAND Flash Memory Devices, 337-TA-553 (Hynix v. Toshiba). Represented Toshiba in both investigations.
Inkmarkers, Inv. No. 337-TA-522 (Sanford v. Ningbo Beifa, et al.). Represented respondent Ningbo Beifa in a case involving the trade dress of its ink marker products. The action was ultimately settled.
Systems for Detecting Computer Viruses/Worms, 337-TA-510 (Trend Micro v. Fortinet). Represented respondent Fortinet in both a patent action and a subsequent enforcement action commenced by Trend Micro.
Signature Capture Transaction Devices, Inv. 337-TA-504 (NCR v. Ingenico, et al.). Represented complainant NCR in an action involving allegations of patent infringement; helped NCR secure a favorable settlement.
Automated Mechanical Truck Transmission Systems, Inv. 337-TA-503 (Eaton v. ZF Meritor, et al.). Represented complainant Eaton in proceedings before the ITC, Court of International Trade, and United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Universal Transmitters for Garage Door Openers, Inv. No. 337-TA-497 (Chamberlain v. Skylink Technologies, et al.). Represented respondent Skylink. Obtained summary determination of non-violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The investigation was the first at the ITC to involve the DMCA.
Home Vacuum Packaging Machines, 337-TA-496 (Tilia v. The Holmes Group, et al.). Represented complainant Tilia in a fully litigated temporary relief (TEO) proceeding and thereafter secured a favorable settlement on permanent relief.
Display Controllers and Products Containing Same, 337-TA-481/491 (Enforcement) (Genesis Microchip v. MStar Semiconductor, et al.). Represented respondent MStar Semiconductor in an enforcement proceeding brought by Genesis.
Microlithographic Machines, Inv. No. 337-TA-468 (Nikon v. ASML). Represented complainant Nikon. Nikon ultimately obtained a settlement of $145 million, in resolution of the Section 337 investigation and district court litigation.
Breath Test Systems for the Detection of Gastrointestinal Disorders, Inv. No. 337-TA-495 (Meretek Diagnostics v. Oridion, et al.). Obtained Consent Orders against the respondents in an action involving medical devices.
Semiconductor Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-472 (Toshiba v. Samsung). Represented Toshiba, with the case ending in an early settlement favorable to Toshiba.
Semiconductor Memory Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-470 (Mosel Vitelic v. Hitachi). Represented Mosel Vitelic, with the case ending in an early settlement favorable to Mosel Vitelic.
Set Top Boxes (Interactive TV Guide), Inv. No. 337-TA-454 (Gemstar et al. v. Echostar et al.). Represented respondent Echostar against claims of infringement and in asserting a defense of patent misuse. The ITC found no violation, in favor of Echostar.
Excimer Laser Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-419 (VISX v. Nidek). Represented respondent Nidek against charges of patent infringement related to equipment used for corrective laser eye surgery. The ITC found no violation on multiple grounds.
Disposable Cameras (Lens-Fitted-Film Packages), Inv. No. 337-TA-406 (Fuji Photo Film v. Achiever, et al.). Represented Fuji against imports from multiple sources, primarily located in China, securing a General Exclusion Order.
Hardware Logic Emulators, Inv. No. 337-TA-383 (Quickturn v. Mentor Graphics et al.). Successfully represented complainant Quickturn and obtained an Exclusion Order against Mentor.
Human Growth Hormone, Inv. No. 337-TA-358 (Genentech v. Novo Nordisk et al.). Represented complainant Genentech.
Cell Phones, Inv. No. 337-TA-297 (Motorola v. Nokia). Represented Nokia in a high-profile case involving early cell phones, securing a settlement favorable to Nokia that permitted continued imports.
DRAMs, Inv. No. 337-TA-242 (Texas Instruments v. NEC et al.). Represented respondent NEC in a case in which the ITC found no violation of Section 337 by NEC. TI and NEC eventually settled.
Optical Waveguide Fibers, Inv. No. 337-TA-189 (Corning v. Sumitomo Electric Industries). Represented respondent Sumitomo Electric. The ITC reached a determination of no violation.
Burn Beds (Fluidized Supporting Apparatus), Inv. No. 337-TA-182/188 (Support Systems Int’l v. UHI Corp.). Obtained a preliminary determination of violation for complainant Support Systems in Inv. 337-TA-182 and successfully defended against a charge of infringement by UHI in Inv. 337-TA-188. The cases settled very favorably for Support Systems.
