Elizabeth Day is a trial lawyer who concentrates her practice on the litigation of patent infringement and other intellectual property-related lawsuits, including the misappropriation of trade secrets and the Lanham Act. Ms. Day has represented clients in numerous patent infringement matters pending throughout the United States, including cases in Texas, Wisconsin, Delaware, California, Oregon and Washington and the ITC. Ms. Day was named one of the top 75 female litigators in the state of California in 2006. In addition to her more than a dozen trials, Ms. Day has primary responsibility for handling the damages aspects of the matters on which she works.

Among her recent matters:

Patent:

• Samsung v. Quanta Computer et. al. Obtained jury verdict of $ 9 million in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patent concerns the implementation of hotkey functionality in notebook computers.
• CollegeNET, Inc. v. XAP Corporation. Obtained jury verdict $8.5 million in a patent infringement and Lanham Act action pending in the U. S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The asserted patents concern technology related to applying for college over the Internet.
• IMX, Inc. v. LendingTree, LLC. Obtained jury verdict of willful infringement and damages in a patent infringement action pending in the U. S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The asserted patent concerns technology related to applying for loans over the Internet.
• E-Pass Technologies, Inc. v. Palm, Inc. Obtained summary judgment ruling of non-infringement on behalf of Palm in a patent case pending in the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patent concerns technology related to hand-held devices.
• Charles E. Hill & Associates v. Amazon.com, Inc. et.al.: Obtained favorable settlements for each of the 13 defendants represented in a patent infringement action pending in the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The three asserted patents concern technology related to internet transactions.
• AD Technology, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company: One of several team members representing Hewlett-Packard in a multi-venue, multi-patent dispute with Gateway and its subsidiaries. Obtained favorable settlement for Hewlett-Packard in a patent dispute pending in the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The asserted patent concerns technology related to graphics.
• Nestle v. Clorox: Obtained favorable settlement for Clorox in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The two asserted patents concern improved cat litter.
• In the Matter of Certain Zero-Mercury Added Alkaline Batteries, Parts Thereof and Products Containing Same: Obtained favorable settlement for defendant Monster Cable Products, Inc. in a patent infringement action pending in the International Trade Commission.
• Samsung v. Inventec: Obtained a favorable settlement for Samsung in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The asserting patents concern technology related to notebook computers.
• Firepond v. Banter: Obtained a favorable settlement for Banter Systems, Inc. in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The asserted patent concerned technology related to email management and response systems that use natural language processing.
• JPSA v. New Wave Research: Obtained a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss in a declaratory patent infringement action against New Wave Research pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. The asserted patent concerns technology related to scribing sapphire substrates with solid state UV lasers.
• Mindfabric v. Inquira: Obtained a favorable settlement for Inquira in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patents concerned technology related to natural language processing systems.
• Mindfabric v. Banter: Obtained a favorable settlement for Banter Systems, Inc. in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patents concerned technology related to natural language processing systems.
• ImageX v. iPrint: Defeated motion for preliminary injunction on behalf of iPrint in a patent infringement action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The asserted patent concerned technology related to internet printing systems.
• Adobe Systems Incorporated v. Macromedia, Inc.: Obtained jury verdict of willful patent infringement in favor of Adobe Systems in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The asserted patent concerned technology related to graphical user interfaces.
• Macromedia v. Adobe Systems Incorporated: Obtained favorable settlement for Adobe after a jury found the Macromedia patents willfully infringed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Two of the three asserted patents concerned technology related to sound editing and the other asserted patent concerned technology related to illustration software.
• Neomagic, Inc. v. Trident Microsystems, Inc.: Obtained summary judgment verdict of non-infringement in favor of Trident in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Assisted with oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the verdict of non-infringement. The asserted patents concerned technology related to embedded DRAMS.
• Phonetel, Inc. v. Unical Enterprises, Inc.: Obtained favorable settlement for Unical in a patent infringement case relating to answering machine technology in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The asserted patents concerned technology related to answering machines.
• Storage Technology Corporation v. EMC Corporation: Obtained verdict in favor of EMC in a patent infringement action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patent and license agreement concerned technology related to data storage devices.
• Phonetel, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Corporation: Obtained favorable settlement for Hewlett-Packard in a patent infringement case relating to answering machine technology in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The asserted patents concerned technology related to answering machines.
• BioTek V. Biogenex: Obtained jury verdict of willful patent infringement in favor of Biogenex in a declaratory relief patent infringement action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The asserted patent concerned technology related to immunostaining.
• United Video v. Starsight Telecast: Obtained finding of no inequitable conduct in favor of Starsight Telecast in a declaratory relief patent infringement action filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. The asserted patent concerned technology related to electronic program guides.

Trade Secret:

• Guzik Technical Enterprises v. KMY Instruments, Inc.: Obtained favorable settlement for KMY Instruments during trial in a misappropriation of trade secrets case.
• Vantress v. Space Designs, Inc.: Obtained summary judgment verdict in favor of Space Designs in a misappropriation of trade secrets case.

Copyright:

• Western Imaging, Inc. v. Visigenic (Inprise) Corporation: Obtained favorable settlement for Visigenic in a copyright infringement case filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Awards
Named one of the top 75 female litigators in the State of California in 2006

Admissions

• California
• Supreme Court of California
• United States District Court for the Northern District of California
• United States District Court for the Central District of California
• United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
• United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Memberships

• The Federal Circuit Bar Association
• American Intellectual Property Law Association
• Intellectual Property Inns of Court
• The Junior League of Mid-Peninsula/Palo Alto

Publications

• "The Group, How to Be Smart About Entering a Joint Defense Arrangement," written by M. Elizabeth Day and Edward Sikorski, IP Legal Times, April 23, 2007

Seminars

• Women in IP Law: Successfully Navigating Complex IP Issues, September 17, 2008
• Women in IP Law: Practical Tips from the Bench and Bar to Further Your Career, October 11, 2007
• International Dispute Resolution: Key Issues and Considerations, October 4, 2007
• Intellectual Property Litigation Issues for In-House Counsel: IP Damages and Resisting Damages Discovery, 2005 and 2006

Prior Experience

• Associate, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
• Associate, Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich LLP
• Associate, Hoge, Fenton, Jones & Appel