Representative Experience

  •  BrightEdge Technologies, Inc. v. Searchmetrics GmbH and Searchmetrics Inc., United States District Court, Northern District of California. Currently representing Searchmetrics in 5-patent litigation related to search engine optimization technology.  Won a motion for judgment on the pleadings invalidating all five patents because patents lack of patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
  • Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. Toshiba Corporation et al. – United States District Court, District of Delaware. Represented Toshiba in a 10-patent litigation accusing technology ranging from NAND flash memory, hard disk drives, and products using USB. Two patents were dismissed following successful IPR final decisions. Obtained summary judgment of invalidity as to one patent and jury verdict of invalidity or noninfringement as to three memory patents at trial
  • Certain Optical Disc Drives, Components Thereof, And Products Containing The Same (337-TA-897). Represented respondent in ITC investigation involving 6 patents regarding optical disc drive technology. Obtained two Initial Determinations from the ALJ finding complainant did not have standing, which were upheld by the Commission after review
  • CpuMate Inc. and Golden Sun News Techniques Co., Ltd. v. Toshiba Corporation, et al. – United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas and Central District of California. Represented Toshiba in patent case involving cooling technology in computers. Won motion to transfer case from Eastern District of Texas to Central District of California
  • TVI v. Toshiba Corporation – United States District Court, Northern District of California. Represented Toshiba in a four-patent case involving DVD technology
  • NetApp v. Sun Microsystems and Sun Microsystems v. NetApp – United States District Court, Northern District of California. Represented Sun in three District Court patent infringement actions between Sun and NetApp. The parties litigated 39 patents, most of which are directed to storage technology. Obtained favorable settlement
  • Yamaha v. TSST – United States District Court, Central District of California. Represented two TSST entities in 11-patent litigation involving optical disk drives
  • Certain Personal Computer and Digital Display Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-606): Represented Hewlett-Packard in ITC against Acer, Inc. Technology involved computer bus architecture, LCD scalar chips and rewritable DVD drives. Obtained favorable settlement after ITC trial before issuance of Initial Determination
  • Hitachi Global Storage Technology (HGST) v. Samsung: Represented Samsung in EDTX against claims of patent infringement. Technology involved hard disk drive formats. Obtained favorable settlement
  • CollegeNET, Inc. v. XAP Corporation. Obtained jury verdict US$8.5 million in a patent infringement and Lanham Act action in the US District Court for the District of Oregon. Technology related to applying for college over the Internet
  • Zoran Corporation v. MediaTek, Inc. et al. – United States International Trade Commission. Represented complainants Zoran and Oak Technology in asserting three patents related to optical disk controller chips and DVD players. Obtained Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Order against MediaTek and ten of its customers as to one patent. Case subsequently settled on terms extremely favorable to Zoran and Oak
  • MediaTek, Inc. v. Zoran Corporation – United States International Trade Commission. Defended respondents Zoran and Oak against allegations of infringing three patents relating to optical disk controller chips. Obtained Initial Determination of non-infringement and invalidity. Case subsequently settled on terms favorable to Zoran and Oak