Stanford v. Roche Molecular Sys., Inc., ___ U.S. ___ (2011): Briefed position of American Association of University Professors, IEEE-USA, and IP Advocate as amici curiae to the Supreme Court in landmark victory interpreting the Bayh-Dole Act, which the press says "hewed closely to arguments put forward in [our brief]." [Read Article] [Read Brief] [Read Opinion]
Extreme Networks, Inc. v. Enterasys Networks, Inc., ___ F.3d. ___ (Fed. Cir. 2010): Presented the oral argument and won reversal of adverse claim construction and summary judgment of noninfringement, allowing Enterasys on remand to proceed with its charge that Extreme infringed its patent claims covering packet routing technology. [Listen to Argument] [Read Opinion]
Western Union Co. v. MoneyGram Payment Sys., Inc., ___ F.3d ___ (Fed. Cir. 2010): Assisted in winning full reversal and entry of judgment that Western Union's patent claims asserted against MoneyGram were obvious and thus invalid. [Read Opinion]
In re Petition of the Berglands (D. Ct., Stearns County, 2010): As pro bono lead counsel for the guardian ad litem in a four-party contested adoption, won both phases of the bifurcated trial. We first established that the county "unreasonably withheld" consent from the guardian's preferred adoptive couple, overturning the initial award of the children to another couple based on a misapplied "relative preference." Then we persuaded the court to order, in the "best interests" of the children, their permanent placement with the current foster parents.
Imation Corp. v. Koninklijke Philips Elec. N.V., et al., (Fed. Cir. 2009): Convinced the appellate court to reverse the entry of judgment on the pleadings dismissing two of Imation's key counts, and instead to order judgment for Imation on the question of whether certain entities formed or acquired later qualify as "subsidiaries" that could benefit from Imation's patent license with Philips. [Read Opinion]
Andersen Corp. v. Pella Corp., et al., 300 Fed.Appx. 893 (Fed. Cir. 2008): Won reversal on appeal of a post-KSR summary judgment holding patent claims obvious. [Read Opinion]
General Mills, Inc. v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 495 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2007): Obtained affirmance of a district court decision that Kraft failed to maintain its counterclaim after General Mills filed an amended complaint, in a case of first impression before the Federal Circuit interpreting Rule 12(a)(4)(A). [Read Opinion]
Argued two additional patent appeals before the court in 2008, and has participated in over 20 total appeals in patent matters, including assisting in obtaining the 2003 reversal of a claim construction and non-infringement summary judgment in an appeal that led to the Federal Circuit construing the key Internet term "URL". [Listen to Prism Argument] [Listen to Fargo Argument] [Read ACTV Opinion]
Authored brief for five prominent Minnesota companies as amici curiae in the Eastern District of Virginia in support of enjoining the new PTO Final Rules, which was ordered in 2008. [Read Brief]
Tried two Section 337 hearings before the ITC, including handling all patent-related issues and winning the only patent infringement-based general exclusion order issued in 2000, as well as proposing and conducting the first ITC "chess clock" trial in 2005.
In the matter of Union Oil Company of California ("UNOCAL") (FTC): Part of trial team in defense of Section 5 antitrust allegations brought against UNOCAL based on obtaining and asserting reformulated gasoline patents (settled after Chevron's acquisition of UNOCAL).
Union Oil Co. of California v. Atlantic Richfield Co., et al.: Member of core team in action for infringement of UNOCAL gasoline patent, tried in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (J. Wardlaw). Jury verdict for UNOCAL on liability, Oct. 1997; judgment entered in the amount of $91 million, including five months of accrued infringement (affirmed, 208 F.3d 989 (Fed. Cir. 2000)).