Patent Litigation
Our patent litigation team at Larkin Hoffman understands that protecting a client’s valuable patent rights, a company’s technology, and products from third party patents, is a valuable and complex part of a client’s overall business strategy.
We strive to achieve the best results for that strategy – whether it be through favorable licensing, settlement, or litigating a case through trial. Our team of seasoned and successful litigators and trial attorneys have experience at every stage of a patent infringement lawsuit or declaratory judgment action. We also have extensive experience in negotiating licensing agreements with favorable terms for our clients. We are battle tested at discovery, Markman, summary judgment, and trial. We also have team members who have successfully appealed to the Federal Circuit.
CNF Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger, Larkin Hoffman attorney, defended Mobility Electronics in CNF Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Ariz.) patent infringement lawsuit brought six days before Mobility Electronic’s IPO. The patents pertained to docking stations for portable computers. Prepared an opinion substantiating that the action was without merit, and successfully convinced the underwriters’ counsel such that the IPO went forward without amending the registration statement. The end result was that the client was able to raise $48M. Subsequently, negotiated the purchase of the patent-in-suit, prior to the plaintiff filing for bankruptcy and dismissing the lawsuit. Thereafter, prosecuted and obtained a broadened Reissue patent with improved claims, which became part of a patent portfolio that divested for $15M.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc. (Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc.) and Targus Group International, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger acted as counsel for plaintiff Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc. (Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc.) and Targus Group International, Inc. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case against market leader Comarco Wireless and partner Targus Group involving numerous patents directed to programmable power converters. Successfully negotiated a favorable license, Targus Group thereafter became a distribution partner of Mobility Electronics, and Radio Shack became a master retailer.
North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging Inc. et al. (N.D. Tex.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger represented defendant Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. in a highly-publicized and often-cited patent infringement case involving polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. Following a Markman hearing, the trial court granted summary judgment for Reckitt Benckiser, holding that the reissue claims at issue were invalid under the recapture doctrine. The trial court’s decision was substantially upheld by the Federal Circuit.
Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger defended Mobility Electronics/iGo in Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case involving power adapters for portable electronic devices. Following an evidentiary hearing, after which the Court gave credence to Mobility Electronics' invalidity defense for inequitable conduct, the Court denied the plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief. The lawsuit settled shortly thereafter. The denial of the injunction allowed Mobility Electronics' flagship product, a combination AC/DC power adapter, to stay on the market. Mobility and partner Radio Shack achieved significant market success thereafter.
Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers (S.D. Iowa)
The case Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers (S.D. Iowa) which involved the interplay between patents and trade dress rights. Midwest asserted trade dress protection in a unique curved winch post configuration for personal watercraft trailers. Midwest appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Karavan, holding that Midwest’s trade dress claims were barred by federal patent law because Midwest had design patents for the curved winch post and a utility patent in which the curved winch post was claimed. Larkin Hoffman attorney Tom Oppold took over this case on appeal and successfully argued on behalf of Midwest to the Federal Circuit.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Formosa Electronics Industries, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Bob Klinger, Larkin Hoffman patent litigation attorney, represented Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Formosa Electronics Industries, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement suit based on eight patents against a Taiwanese manufacturer and importer of power adapter technology.
Field v. Grabber Mfg. Co. (M.D. Fla.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney, Tom Oppold, served as counsel for Field in Field v. Grabber Mfg. Co. (M.D. Fla.) a patent infringement case involving automotive collision repair machines. A significant damages award for the inventor was awarded by the jury.
Engineered Products v. Donaldson Company (N.D. Iowa)
Craig Lervick served as counsel for Engineered Products through trial in a patent infringement lawsuit related to devices that detect the level of contamination of an air filter of an internal combustion engine, Engineered Products v. Donaldson Company (N.D. Iowa). At trial, a jury verdict of willful infringement was obtained. The jury awarded Engineered Products over $5 million in damages, which was trebled to over $15M by the district court. On appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld over $11 million of the damages originally awarded to the client.
Patent Harbor v. Twentieth Century Fox, et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Tom Oppold, John Cotter and Jerry Podkopacz served as counsel for Venturer Electronics in a patent infringement action brought by Patent Harbor against numerous defendants involving a patent alleged to cover DVD players with scene selection features. After a favorable Markman ruling, Patent Harbor agreed to stipulate to non-infringement and an order was entered dismissing Venturer Electronics and other defendants.
Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Pierre Fabre S.A. et al. (D.N.J.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Pierre Fabre in Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Pierre Fabre S.A. et al. (D.N.J.), a patent infringement lawsuit involving patents related to methods for alleviating wrinkles and compositions for treating cosmetic or dermatologic skin disorders. The case settled before the Court issued a Markman order.
SIPCO, LLC v. Datamatic, Ltd., EKA Systems, Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Sensus USA Inc., and Trilliant Networks Inc.
Bob Klinger represented Datamatic, Ltd. in SIPCO, LLC v. Datamatic, Ltd., EKA Systems, Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Sensus USA Inc., and Trilliant Networks Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought by a non-practicing entity based on a large portfolio of patents directed to wireless mesh networks in the field of utility meter readers and routers. Counseled the client through a Markman hearing, and thereafter negotiated a license and settled the case.
Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc., Hipro Electronics Co., Ltd., and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger defended Mobility Electronics in this patent infringement case directed to Mobility Electronics’ new Juice product after it entered the market. The case settled favorably with Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.).
Western Union Co. v. MoneyGram Payment Systems Inc. (W.D. Tex.)
Glenna Gilbert defended MoneyGram through trial in Western Union Co. v. MoneyGram Payment Systems Inc. (W.D. Tex.). This patent infringement lawsuit involved patents related to systems and methods for performing money transfers. Western Union obtained a verdict awarding the plaintiff damages. On appeal, however, the Federal Circuit reversed the jury verdict, holding that Western Union’s patent claims were invalid as obvious.
Kathleen Adams v. Newell Rubbermaid Inc. (W.D. Wis.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Newell Rubbermaid, and its sales of the Rubbermaid Premier line. Kathleen Adams v. Newell Rubbermaid Inc. (W.D. Wis.) involved a patent infringement action related to a system of stackable storage containers. Near the eve of trial, the case settled.
Cimline, Inc. v. Crafco, Inc. (D. Minn.)
Paul Smith, Lauris Heyerdahl and Melissa Hagstrum served as counsel for Cimline in Cimline, Inc. v. Crafco, Inc. (D. Minn.). The group affirmatively sought a declaration of non-infringement as to Cimline’s product while attempting to invalidate a competitor’s patent, which was also contended to have been misused in the marketplace. In a widely cited 2011 case, the Federal Circuit adopted Cimline’s position and declared the patent of Crafco invalid as obvious, clearing the way for entry into the marketplace and an assessment of damages.
ICHL, LLC v. NEC Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc., and Lenovo, Inc.
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. NEC Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc., and Lenovo, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of portable computer manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on microprocessors, and video graphics processors. ICHL entered into favorable licenses.
Favorable Licenses Entered in Result of a Successful Patent Infringement Case
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc., LG Electronics, SIM2 USA, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of DLP television manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on digital imaging processors. The case resulted in favorable licenses.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. American Power Conversion Corp. (E.D. Tex.)
Bob Klinger served as counsel for Mobility Electronics inMobility Electronics, Inc. v. American Power Conversion Corp. (E.D. Tex.) a patent infringement lawsuit alleging infringement of seven patents directed to portable programmable power converters. Represented Mobility Electronics in a related action between the parties in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, titled American Power Conversion Corp. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Mass.). Both cases settled on favorable terms for the client.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. SBS Technologies, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger served as counsel for Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. SBS Technologies, Inc. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case involving split-bridge PCI computer bus technology, and expansion systems for portable computer interfaces. The case settled with a favorable royalty-bearing license.
iGo, Inc. f/k/a Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc., et al. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger represented iGo in iGo, Inc. f/k/a Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc., et al. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement suit asserting two patents against longtime competitor Comarco. This suit also included a claim for breach of contract based on an earlier settlement/cross license agreement, and involved iGo’s business relationship with partner Radio Shack Corporation. After substantial discovery and motions, both parties agreed to drop the litigation with each side bearing its own costs.
DR Systems, Inc. v. ScImage, Inc., Brit Systems, Inc. et al. (S.D. Cal.)
Bob Klinger defended Brit Systems, Inc. and ScImage, Inc. in DR Systems, Inc. v. ScImage, Inc., Brit Systems, Inc. et al. (S.D. Cal.), a patent infringement case regarding automated medical imaging and archival systems. After discovery, the case against ScImage and Brit was dismissed.
Auxilium Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Upsher-Smith Laboratories Inc. in Auxilium Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del.), a Hatch-Waxman litigation involving patents related to transdermal pharmaceutical products.
Edge Capture LLC et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, UBS AG et al. (N.D. Ill.)
In Edge Capture LLC et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, UBS AG et al. (N.D. Ill.), Glenna Gilbert served as counsel for Edge Specialists and Edge Capture in the early stages of discovery of a patent infringement lawsuit involving automated options trading systems and methods.
Klinger Represent ICHL Against Video Graphics Controller Manufacturers
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. BFG Technologies, Inc., EVGA Corp., Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc., PNY Technologies, Inc., and Eastcom Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of video graphics controller manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on video graphics processors. ICHL entered into favorable licenses.
Cedarapids, Inc. v. CMI Corp. (N.D. Iowa)
Tom Oppold served as counsel for CMI in Cedarapids, Inc. v. CMI Corp. (N.D. Iowa), a patent infringement action in which CMI was accused of infringing a Cedarapids patent for drum mixers used for heating and preparing asphalt for roads. After the Markman hearing and filing of summary judgment motions, a stipulation of dismissal was filed by the parties.
Farmer Fabrications, Inc. v. Precision Planting, Inc. (C.D. Ill.)
Farmer Fabrications, Inc. v. Precision Planting, Inc. (C.D. Ill.) involved a patent infringement lawsuit related to liquid fertilizer applicator tubes mounted to a seed firmer on a planter. Tom Oppold obtained a summary judgment of invalidity of the patent asserted against the client.
Augustine Medical v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero et al. (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick represented Augustine Medical in multiple related patent infringement actions regarding convective heating blankets used in medical settings. All of the related actions settled before trial. Craig participated in discovery and pretrial depositions and motions.
Datascope Corp. v. Vascular Solutions (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick served as counsel for Datascope in Datascope Corp. v. Vascular Solutions (D. Minn.), a patent infringement lawsuit related to technology involving healing technologies following catheter procedures. The case settled following the filing of summary judgment motions.
Quipp Systems, Inc. v. Cannon Equipment Company (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick defended Cannon Equipment in Quipp Systems, Inc. v. Cannon Equipment Company (D. Minn.), a patent infringement action related to newspaper bundle handling equipment. The case settled following pretrial motions. Craig lead the initial stages of discovery in this case and participated in pretrial hearings.
Universal Electronics Inc. v. Remote Technologies et al. (C.D. Cal.)
Craig Lervick represented Remote Technologies in Universal Electronics Inc. v. Remote Technologies et al. (C.D. Cal.), a patent infringement lawsuit relating to remote control technologies. The case was settled before discovery.
Satellite Industries, Inc. v. L.T. Hampel Corp. (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick represented Satellite Industries in Satellite Industries, Inc. v. L.T. Hampel Corp. (D. Minn.), a patent infringement lawsuit relating to door designs for portable bathrooms. Craig negotiated a settlement for the client before the commencement of discovery.
Menasha Corp. v. Smyth Companies Inc. (E.D. Wis.)
Craig Lervick defended Smyth Companies in Menasha Corp. v. Smyth Companies Inc. (E.D. Wis.), a patent infringement lawsuit involving a patent related to label printing technology. Craig negotiated a favorable settlement for the client before the commencement of discovery.
Moose Mountain Toymakers Ltd. v. Majik Ltd. (D.N.J.)
In Moose Mountain Toymakers Ltd. v. Majik Ltd. (D.N.J.), a design patent infringement case related to a toy design, Tom Oppold assisted in preparing a successful motion to dismiss on behalf of Majik on the grounds that the accused product, after discounting the functional features, was sufficiently different from the patented design to avoid infringement under the ordinary observer test.
Home Products International, LLC v. Hampton Direct Inc. (S.D. Fla.).
Tom Oppold and Glenna Gilbert represented Home Products in Home Products International, LLC v. Hampton Direct Inc. (S.D. Fla.). This design patent infringement case was related to a design for hangers. Tom and Glenna obtained a favorable settlement for the client before discovery.
We strive to achieve the best results for that strategy – whether it be through favorable licensing, settlement, or litigating a case through trial. Our team of seasoned and successful litigators and trial attorneys have experience at every stage of a patent infringement lawsuit or declaratory judgment action. We also have extensive experience in negotiating licensing agreements with favorable terms for our clients. We are battle tested at discovery, Markman, summary judgment, and trial. We also have team members who have successfully appealed to the Federal Circuit.
We collectively have handled patent litigation in at least seventeen federal district courts, including key venues such as:
-
Texas
-
California
-
Delaware
-
Illinois
-
Massachusetts
-
New Jersey
-
Wisconsin
-
Minnesota
-
Florida
-
Arizona
-
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
-
International Trade Commission
We are comprised of highly-skilled individuals well-versed not only in patent law, but also in technology and the sciences, and the intricacies of how the law, technology and business strategies work together in patent litigation. Many of our team members are registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Several members are engineers, some have advanced degrees in the sciences, and others have in-house counseling experience at industry leaders. Consequently, the members of our patent litigation team have represented clients in a vast array of technologies and sciences, including:
- Computers, e-commerce, and related hardware and software
- Medical devices and equipment and related technology
- Semiconductors
- Pharmaceuticals
- Business methods
- Electrical and electronic devices (including consumer electronic devices)
- Digital imaging processors
- Wireless technologies
- Automated options trading
- Contact lenses
- Dermatology
- Ophthalmology
- Money transfer systems
- Chemistry
- Food science
- Agricultural equipment and sensors
- Automotive equipment
- Consumer goods
CNF Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger, Larkin Hoffman attorney, defended Mobility Electronics in CNF Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Ariz.) patent infringement lawsuit brought six days before Mobility Electronic’s IPO. The patents pertained to docking stations for portable computers. Prepared an opinion substantiating that the action was without merit, and successfully convinced the underwriters’ counsel such that the IPO went forward without amending the registration statement. The end result was that the client was able to raise $48M. Subsequently, negotiated the purchase of the patent-in-suit, prior to the plaintiff filing for bankruptcy and dismissing the lawsuit. Thereafter, prosecuted and obtained a broadened Reissue patent with improved claims, which became part of a patent portfolio that divested for $15M.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc. (Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc.) and Targus Group International, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger acted as counsel for plaintiff Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc. (Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc.) and Targus Group International, Inc. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case against market leader Comarco Wireless and partner Targus Group involving numerous patents directed to programmable power converters. Successfully negotiated a favorable license, Targus Group thereafter became a distribution partner of Mobility Electronics, and Radio Shack became a master retailer.
North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging Inc. et al. (N.D. Tex.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger represented defendant Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. in a highly-publicized and often-cited patent infringement case involving polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. Following a Markman hearing, the trial court granted summary judgment for Reckitt Benckiser, holding that the reissue claims at issue were invalid under the recapture doctrine. The trial court’s decision was substantially upheld by the Federal Circuit.
Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney Bob Klinger defended Mobility Electronics/iGo in Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case involving power adapters for portable electronic devices. Following an evidentiary hearing, after which the Court gave credence to Mobility Electronics' invalidity defense for inequitable conduct, the Court denied the plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief. The lawsuit settled shortly thereafter. The denial of the injunction allowed Mobility Electronics' flagship product, a combination AC/DC power adapter, to stay on the market. Mobility and partner Radio Shack achieved significant market success thereafter.
Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers (S.D. Iowa)
The case Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers (S.D. Iowa) which involved the interplay between patents and trade dress rights. Midwest asserted trade dress protection in a unique curved winch post configuration for personal watercraft trailers. Midwest appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Karavan, holding that Midwest’s trade dress claims were barred by federal patent law because Midwest had design patents for the curved winch post and a utility patent in which the curved winch post was claimed. Larkin Hoffman attorney Tom Oppold took over this case on appeal and successfully argued on behalf of Midwest to the Federal Circuit.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Formosa Electronics Industries, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Bob Klinger, Larkin Hoffman patent litigation attorney, represented Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Formosa Electronics Industries, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement suit based on eight patents against a Taiwanese manufacturer and importer of power adapter technology.
Field v. Grabber Mfg. Co. (M.D. Fla.)
Larkin Hoffman attorney, Tom Oppold, served as counsel for Field in Field v. Grabber Mfg. Co. (M.D. Fla.) a patent infringement case involving automotive collision repair machines. A significant damages award for the inventor was awarded by the jury.
Engineered Products v. Donaldson Company (N.D. Iowa)
Craig Lervick served as counsel for Engineered Products through trial in a patent infringement lawsuit related to devices that detect the level of contamination of an air filter of an internal combustion engine, Engineered Products v. Donaldson Company (N.D. Iowa). At trial, a jury verdict of willful infringement was obtained. The jury awarded Engineered Products over $5 million in damages, which was trebled to over $15M by the district court. On appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld over $11 million of the damages originally awarded to the client.
Patent Harbor v. Twentieth Century Fox, et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Tom Oppold, John Cotter and Jerry Podkopacz served as counsel for Venturer Electronics in a patent infringement action brought by Patent Harbor against numerous defendants involving a patent alleged to cover DVD players with scene selection features. After a favorable Markman ruling, Patent Harbor agreed to stipulate to non-infringement and an order was entered dismissing Venturer Electronics and other defendants.
Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Pierre Fabre S.A. et al. (D.N.J.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Pierre Fabre in Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Pierre Fabre S.A. et al. (D.N.J.), a patent infringement lawsuit involving patents related to methods for alleviating wrinkles and compositions for treating cosmetic or dermatologic skin disorders. The case settled before the Court issued a Markman order.
SIPCO, LLC v. Datamatic, Ltd., EKA Systems, Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Sensus USA Inc., and Trilliant Networks Inc.
Bob Klinger represented Datamatic, Ltd. in SIPCO, LLC v. Datamatic, Ltd., EKA Systems, Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Sensus USA Inc., and Trilliant Networks Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought by a non-practicing entity based on a large portfolio of patents directed to wireless mesh networks in the field of utility meter readers and routers. Counseled the client through a Markman hearing, and thereafter negotiated a license and settled the case.
Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc., Hipro Electronics Co., Ltd., and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger defended Mobility Electronics in this patent infringement case directed to Mobility Electronics’ new Juice product after it entered the market. The case settled favorably with Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Xtend Micro Products, Inc. and iGo Corporation (D. Ariz.).
Western Union Co. v. MoneyGram Payment Systems Inc. (W.D. Tex.)
Glenna Gilbert defended MoneyGram through trial in Western Union Co. v. MoneyGram Payment Systems Inc. (W.D. Tex.). This patent infringement lawsuit involved patents related to systems and methods for performing money transfers. Western Union obtained a verdict awarding the plaintiff damages. On appeal, however, the Federal Circuit reversed the jury verdict, holding that Western Union’s patent claims were invalid as obvious.
Kathleen Adams v. Newell Rubbermaid Inc. (W.D. Wis.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Newell Rubbermaid, and its sales of the Rubbermaid Premier line. Kathleen Adams v. Newell Rubbermaid Inc. (W.D. Wis.) involved a patent infringement action related to a system of stackable storage containers. Near the eve of trial, the case settled.
Cimline, Inc. v. Crafco, Inc. (D. Minn.)
Paul Smith, Lauris Heyerdahl and Melissa Hagstrum served as counsel for Cimline in Cimline, Inc. v. Crafco, Inc. (D. Minn.). The group affirmatively sought a declaration of non-infringement as to Cimline’s product while attempting to invalidate a competitor’s patent, which was also contended to have been misused in the marketplace. In a widely cited 2011 case, the Federal Circuit adopted Cimline’s position and declared the patent of Crafco invalid as obvious, clearing the way for entry into the marketplace and an assessment of damages.
ICHL, LLC v. NEC Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc., and Lenovo, Inc.
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. NEC Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc., and Lenovo, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of portable computer manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on microprocessors, and video graphics processors. ICHL entered into favorable licenses.
Favorable Licenses Entered in Result of a Successful Patent Infringement Case
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc., LG Electronics, SIM2 USA, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of DLP television manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on digital imaging processors. The case resulted in favorable licenses.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. American Power Conversion Corp. (E.D. Tex.)
Bob Klinger served as counsel for Mobility Electronics inMobility Electronics, Inc. v. American Power Conversion Corp. (E.D. Tex.) a patent infringement lawsuit alleging infringement of seven patents directed to portable programmable power converters. Represented Mobility Electronics in a related action between the parties in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, titled American Power Conversion Corp. v. Mobility Electronics, Inc. (D. Mass.). Both cases settled on favorable terms for the client.
Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. SBS Technologies, Inc. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger served as counsel for Mobility Electronics in Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. SBS Technologies, Inc. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement case involving split-bridge PCI computer bus technology, and expansion systems for portable computer interfaces. The case settled with a favorable royalty-bearing license.
iGo, Inc. f/k/a Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc., et al. (D. Ariz.)
Bob Klinger represented iGo in iGo, Inc. f/k/a Mobility Electronics, Inc. v. Comarco, Inc., et al. (D. Ariz.), a patent infringement suit asserting two patents against longtime competitor Comarco. This suit also included a claim for breach of contract based on an earlier settlement/cross license agreement, and involved iGo’s business relationship with partner Radio Shack Corporation. After substantial discovery and motions, both parties agreed to drop the litigation with each side bearing its own costs.
DR Systems, Inc. v. ScImage, Inc., Brit Systems, Inc. et al. (S.D. Cal.)
Bob Klinger defended Brit Systems, Inc. and ScImage, Inc. in DR Systems, Inc. v. ScImage, Inc., Brit Systems, Inc. et al. (S.D. Cal.), a patent infringement case regarding automated medical imaging and archival systems. After discovery, the case against ScImage and Brit was dismissed.
Auxilium Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del.)
Glenna Gilbert defended Upsher-Smith Laboratories Inc. in Auxilium Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del.), a Hatch-Waxman litigation involving patents related to transdermal pharmaceutical products.
Edge Capture LLC et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, UBS AG et al. (N.D. Ill.)
In Edge Capture LLC et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, UBS AG et al. (N.D. Ill.), Glenna Gilbert served as counsel for Edge Specialists and Edge Capture in the early stages of discovery of a patent infringement lawsuit involving automated options trading systems and methods.
Klinger Represent ICHL Against Video Graphics Controller Manufacturers
Bob Klinger represented ICHL in ICHL, LLC (d/b/a Intellectual Capital Holdings Limited) v. BFG Technologies, Inc., EVGA Corp., Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc., PNY Technologies, Inc., and Eastcom Inc. (E.D. Tex.), a patent infringement case brought against a group of video graphics controller manufacturers based on a patent for split air feed heat sinks used on video graphics processors. ICHL entered into favorable licenses.
Cedarapids, Inc. v. CMI Corp. (N.D. Iowa)
Tom Oppold served as counsel for CMI in Cedarapids, Inc. v. CMI Corp. (N.D. Iowa), a patent infringement action in which CMI was accused of infringing a Cedarapids patent for drum mixers used for heating and preparing asphalt for roads. After the Markman hearing and filing of summary judgment motions, a stipulation of dismissal was filed by the parties.
Farmer Fabrications, Inc. v. Precision Planting, Inc. (C.D. Ill.)
Farmer Fabrications, Inc. v. Precision Planting, Inc. (C.D. Ill.) involved a patent infringement lawsuit related to liquid fertilizer applicator tubes mounted to a seed firmer on a planter. Tom Oppold obtained a summary judgment of invalidity of the patent asserted against the client.
Augustine Medical v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero et al. (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick represented Augustine Medical in multiple related patent infringement actions regarding convective heating blankets used in medical settings. All of the related actions settled before trial. Craig participated in discovery and pretrial depositions and motions.
Datascope Corp. v. Vascular Solutions (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick served as counsel for Datascope in Datascope Corp. v. Vascular Solutions (D. Minn.), a patent infringement lawsuit related to technology involving healing technologies following catheter procedures. The case settled following the filing of summary judgment motions.
Quipp Systems, Inc. v. Cannon Equipment Company (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick defended Cannon Equipment in Quipp Systems, Inc. v. Cannon Equipment Company (D. Minn.), a patent infringement action related to newspaper bundle handling equipment. The case settled following pretrial motions. Craig lead the initial stages of discovery in this case and participated in pretrial hearings.
Universal Electronics Inc. v. Remote Technologies et al. (C.D. Cal.)
Craig Lervick represented Remote Technologies in Universal Electronics Inc. v. Remote Technologies et al. (C.D. Cal.), a patent infringement lawsuit relating to remote control technologies. The case was settled before discovery.
Satellite Industries, Inc. v. L.T. Hampel Corp. (D. Minn.)
Craig Lervick represented Satellite Industries in Satellite Industries, Inc. v. L.T. Hampel Corp. (D. Minn.), a patent infringement lawsuit relating to door designs for portable bathrooms. Craig negotiated a settlement for the client before the commencement of discovery.
Menasha Corp. v. Smyth Companies Inc. (E.D. Wis.)
Craig Lervick defended Smyth Companies in Menasha Corp. v. Smyth Companies Inc. (E.D. Wis.), a patent infringement lawsuit involving a patent related to label printing technology. Craig negotiated a favorable settlement for the client before the commencement of discovery.
Moose Mountain Toymakers Ltd. v. Majik Ltd. (D.N.J.)
In Moose Mountain Toymakers Ltd. v. Majik Ltd. (D.N.J.), a design patent infringement case related to a toy design, Tom Oppold assisted in preparing a successful motion to dismiss on behalf of Majik on the grounds that the accused product, after discounting the functional features, was sufficiently different from the patented design to avoid infringement under the ordinary observer test.
Home Products International, LLC v. Hampton Direct Inc. (S.D. Fla.).
Tom Oppold and Glenna Gilbert represented Home Products in Home Products International, LLC v. Hampton Direct Inc. (S.D. Fla.). This design patent infringement case was related to a design for hangers. Tom and Glenna obtained a favorable settlement for the client before discovery.
