Skip to content
  • Home
  • RSS
  • Contact
  • Client Extranet
  • 800.553.9910

Robins, Kaplan, Miller, & Ciresi, L.L.P.

  • Firm
    • Who We Are
    • Why Us?
    • Legal Project Management
    • Offices
    • Selected Matters
    • Diversity
    • Community
    • Rankings & Recognition
    • Trial Practice Center
    • Seminars & Events
    • Press Room
    • 75th Anniversary
  • Lawyers
  • Services
    • Business Litigation

      • Antitrust and Trade Regulation
      • Class Action Litigation
      • Construction
      • Creditor Representation - Insolvency
      • Employment
      • Entertainment and Media Litigation
      • Government and Internal Investigations
      • Estate Trust and Succession Planning and Administration and Related Litigation
      • Franchise and Dealership
      • Health Care Litigation
      • Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
      • Real Estate Litigation
      • Securities and Financial Litigation

      Intellectual Property Litigation

      • Clean Technology
      • International Trade Commission
      • Life Sciences and Hatch-Waxman Intellectual Property Litigation
      • Patent Office Trials
      • Trademark Infringement Litigation

      Personal Litigation

      • Mass Tort Attorneys
      • Medical Malpractice Attorneys
      • Personal Injury Attorneys

      Concentrations

      • Electronic Discovery
      • International Arbitration

      Business Transactions

      • Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
      • Corporate Finance and Securities
      • Corporate Governance and Special Situations
      • Estate Trust and Succession Planning and Administration and Related Litigation
      • Franchise and Dealership
      • Mergers and Acquisitions
      • Strategic IP Monetization
  • Publications
    • Articles
    • Legal Updates & Newsletters
    • IP Trend
    • News
  • Locations
    • Atlanta
    • Boston
    • Los Angeles
    • Minneapolis
    • Naples
    • New York
  • Careers
    • Associates
    • Summer Associates
    • Staff Attorneys
    • Project Review Attorneys
    • Staff
  1. Lawyers
  2. Martin Lueck
Martin Lueck
Print

Martin R. Lueck

Partner;
Chairman of the Executive Board
mrlueck@rkmc.com 612.349.8587 vCard Address
    • Minneapolis
    • 800 LaSalle Avenue
    • 2800 LaSalle Plaza
    • Minneapolis, MN 55402-2015
    • New York
    • 601 Lexington Avenue
    • Suite 3400
    • New York, NY 10022-4611

I understand business and the business of law. I'm a strategist and an advisor, a musician and a storyteller, and a warrior who has been to battle and knows what winning takes.

Practice Areas

  • Securities and Financial Litigation
  • Corporate Governance and Special Situations
  • International Trade Commission
  • International Arbitration
  • Life Sciences and Hatch-Waxman Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Antitrust and Trade Regulation
  • Business Litigation
  • Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Education
    • William Mitchell College of Law, J.D., cum laude (1984), National finalist in the 1983 ATLA trial advocacy competition
    • Winona State University, B.S. (1978)
  • Professional Associations
    • International Academy of Trial Lawyers, Fellow
    • American College of Trial Lawyers, Fellow
    • Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association
    • American Intellectual Property Law Association
    • American Bar Association
    • Training the Trial Lawyer Task Force, American Bar Association
    • Hennepin County Bar Association
    • Federal Circuit Bar Association
    • American Association for Justice (formerly the Association of Trial Lawyers of America)
    • International Bar Association
  • Bar Admissions
    • Minnesota
    • New York
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
    • U.S. District Court, Minnesota
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • Martin Lueck - Chambers USA 2012 Leading Individual
  • Experience

    Martin Lueck excels at both the art and science of trial advocacy. Mr. Lueck has tried and won "bet the company" cases on both sides of the courtroom in the areas of intellectual property, antitrust, commercial, and business litigation. Persuasive and powerful, Mr. Lueck's breadth of experience as a business trial lawyer and gift for "boiling things down for juries" in litigation's most complex corporate cases produces what Chambers USA describes as "spectacular results for clients."  

    Professional Recognition

    Mr. Lueck is a fellow of both the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers. His professional recognitions include:

    • Selection as one of the "Top 10 Litigators in the Country" by The National Law Journal (2004)
    • Named a "Top 10 Minnesota Super Lawyer" (2010- 2011) and "Top 100 Minnesota Super Lawyer" (2009-2011) by Mpls. St. Paul Magazine
    • Deemed a "Litigation Star" by Benchmark Litigation (2011-2013 editions)
    • Ranked #1 in Minnesota for Litigation: Intellectual Property multiple times in Chambers USA (2008-2011)
    • Repeatedly named one of "500 Leading Lawyers in America" by Lawdragon (2008-2012)
    • Consistently named a "Minnesota Super Lawyer," Super Lawyers (2003-2012)
    • Consistently listed in The Best Lawyers in America (2006-2013 editions)

    His leadership and courtroom track record also played an instrumental role in the firm's recognition as "IP Litigation Department of the Year" by The American Lawyer and IP Law & Business (2004).

    Practice and Results

    Mr. Lueck has spent more than 25 years trying cases, deposing and cross-examining hundreds of witnesses, and connecting with juries. That experience, together with his innate talent and personal interests, fuel Mr. Lueck's ability to deliver a client's message to the trier of fact. Mr. Lueck's love of the outdoors, training as a jazz musician, and interest in restoring vintage machinery also contribute to his unique gift for unraveling complex cases and arguing them persuasively to juries and courts alike. 

    The result is litigation victories across key business practice areas and includes the $520 million patent infringement verdict on behalf of clients Eolas Technologies, Inc. and the Regents of The University of California.

  • Recognition*

    Show All
    • Selected as one of the “Top Rated Lawyers in International Law & International Trade,” American Lawyer Media (2012)
    • Listed as a "Recommended Individual for Litigation and Licensing (Minnesota)," IAM 1000: The World's Leading Patent Practitioners (2012)
    • Named "Minneapolis Patent Law Lawyer of the Year," Best Lawyers (2012)
    • Named a "Top Patent Litigator in the World," Intellectual Asset Management (2011)
    • Listed in IAM250 - World Leading IP Strategists (2011)
    • Named a "Litigation Star," Benchmark Litigation (2011-2013 editions)
    • Ranked #1 in Minnesota for Litigation: Intellectual Property in Chambers USA (2008-2012)
    • Named a "Minnesota Super Lawyer," Super Lawyers (2003-2012)
    • Selected as one of "40 Minnesotans on the Move," Finance and Commerce (2009)
    • Named one of "500  Leading Lawyers in America," Lawdragon (2008-2012)
    • According to Chambers USA’s profile "Martin Lueck is an IP litigator known to be 'very good at boiling things down for juries.'  This has led to some 'spectacular results for clients,' including Honeywell, and a jury verdict in favor of Eolas Technologies and the University of California on issues of infringement, validity, and damages in the region of $520 million.  Keen to stress that these are not freak results, peers enviously noted that 'he wins a lot."
    • Listed in The Best Lawyers in America (2006-2013 editions)
    • Awarded “Distinguished Alumnus Award” by Winona State University (2005)
    • Named one of "Ten of the Nation’s Top Litigators" by The National Law Journal (2004)
    • Selected as one of Minnesota Lawyer's 15 "Attorneys of the Year" (2003)
    • Listed in Marquis Who's Who in the World and Who's Who in American Law

     
    *Being named to the list or receiving the award is not intended and should not be viewed as comparative to other lawyers or to create an expectation about results that might be achieved in a future matter.

  • Selected Case Results**

    Show All

    Antitrust Representations

    In re Wholesale Grocery Products Antitrust Litig., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4584 (D. Minn. Jan. 13, 2013): Lead counsel representing grocery wholesaler SuperValu Inc. in consolidated federal antitrust actions on behalf of putative multi-state class of grocery retailers challenging 2003 asset exchange transaction. Obtained dismissal of several class representatives in favor of arbitration in 2011 (appeal pending), denial of class certification in 2012, and summary judgment dismissing all remaining claims in 2013.

    In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Litigation, 05-MD-1720 (JG)(JO): Reached a $7.25 billion proposed antitrust settlement on behalf of a class of approximately seven million U.S. merchants who accept Visa and MasterCard credit cards and debit cards for the purchase of goods and services. The defendants included Visa and MasterCard, and major card-issuing banks such as JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, and Capital One. The settlement, which resolves the lawsuit, is believed to be the largest settlement of a private antitrust case in the 120-year history of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §1 et seq.) and also includes important reforms of the payment card industry.

    Omnicare Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al.: Lead counsel for trial team that obtained summary judgment for UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and PacifiCare, Inc. in defense of an antitrust lawsuit brought by Omnicare that claimed more than $1 billion in damages based on allegations of price-fixing and fraud related to prescription drug reimbursement.

    Obtained a landmark settlement in favor of a number of Blue Cross/Blue Shield plans and other health insurers for overpayments made for the prescription drugs Paxil and Paxil CR.  Settlement was obtained after lengthy discovery, numerous pretrial motions, and allegations of antitrust violations arising from manufacturers' use of patents to keep generic drugs out of the market.

    In the matter of Union Oil Company of California: Defended UNOCAL in an action brought against it by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Venued in the FTC's own administrative court in Washington, D.C., the case involved the complex intersection of antitrust and patent laws. The FTC claimed that UNOCAL's enforcement of its patents was anticompetitive conduct under § 5 of the FTC Act. Mr. Lueck served as trial counsel in all proceedings before out-of-court agreements ended the FTC's claims.

    Patent Infringement Representations

    Represented ObjectVideo, Inc. in the enforcement of a group of patents related to video analytics against Robert Bosch GmbH, Samsung Techwin Co. Ltd., and Sony Electronics, Inc.  Filed suit in the Eastern District of Virginia in 2011, followed by the initiation of proceedings before the International Trade Commission.  Resolved the dispute with Samsung Techwin Co. Ltd. and Sony Electronics, Inc. before trial.  Conducted trial at the ITC against Robert Bosch GmbH before ALJ Shaw in July 2012.  Resolved the matter against Robert Bosch GmbH just prior to the Initial Determination.

    Eolas Technologies, Inc. and The Regents of the University of California v. Microsoft Corporation:  Won a $520 million verdict on behalf of Eolas Technologies, Inc. and The Regents of the University of California against Microsoft over validity and use of a patent for web browser technology, representing one of the largest jury awards ever in a patent-infringement lawsuit.

    Successfully represented Honeywell Inc. in numerous patent litigation matters, including a case filed in Delaware against the Liquid Crystal Display consumer electronics industry, which led to approximately 85 percent of the manufacturing industry taking a license. 

    Medtronic Inc. v. Boston Scientific, et al.: Tried and won a declaratory judgment action on behalf of Medtronic, obtaining a ruling for Medtronic that it did not infringe two valid implantable cardiac defibrillator patents.

    Electromotive Division of General Motors Corporation v. Transportation Systems Division of General Electric Co., et al.: Obtained summary judgment for General Electric in a patent infringement and trade secrets action brought by General Motors involving diesel locomotives.  Summary judgment was later upheld by the Federal Circuit in Electromotive Div. of General Motors Corp. v. Transportation Systems Div. of General Elec. Co.,  417 F.3d 1203, 75 U.S.P.Q.2d 1650 (Fed. Cir. 2005). 

    Honeywell Inc. v. Victor Company of Japan and U.S. JVC Corp.: Secured a multi-million dollar verdict for Honeywell Inc. in patent infringement litigation against JVC regarding color filters in video cameras.

    Successfully represented Carlson Marketing Group, Inc. in multiple suits involving patents for filtered and non-filtered processing of data on stored value cards and gift cards. 

    UNOCAL Corp. v. ARCO, Chevron, Exxon, Mobil, Shell and Texaco: Secured a $91 million judgment after a jury verdict for Union Oil Company of California (UNOCAL) in a patent infringement action regarding UNOCAL's patent on gasoline fuel.  The verdict was affirmed by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Fonar v. General Electric Co.: Secured an $110,575,000 jury verdict on behalf of Fonar Corp. in a patent infringement action. The verdict was affirmed on appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the amount of $128.5 million.

    Represented SuperValu and Cub Foods against Fleming and Rainbow Foods in an action for theft of trade secrets.  On behalf of SuperValu and Cub, we alleged that Rainbow surreptitiously misappropriated Cub's confidential store specials before publication in local newspapers, and then used that ill gained information to lure shoppers to its stores with lower advertised prices on the same special items.  The case settled favorably on a confidential basis after deposing the CEO of Rainbow Foods.

    Defended ev3, Inc. in an action brought by Boston Scientific Corporation and Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. for misappropriation of trade secrets and infringement of patents related to medical devices known as embolic protection filters.  This case is notable in that we defended allegations that several senior members of Boston Scientific management misappropriated the subject trade secrets when they left Boston Scientific and went to ev3.  The claim for misappropriation of trade secrets was dismissed; the patent case was settled before trial on a confidential basis.

    Complex Commercial and Business Litigation Representations

    Mirant Corp. v. NRG Energy Inc.: Defended NRG Energy Inc. in a highly-publicized lawsuit filed by Mirant Corp. in Delaware Chancery Court involving NRG's rejection of Mirant's $8 billion unsolicited takeover bid. The case was dismissed upon defendant's motion. 

    Represented a high-profile minority-shareholder group in a lawsuit against Timothy Blixseth, the then-billionaire majority owner of the elite Yellowstone Club located near Big Sky, Montana.  The suit was ultimately settled for $39.5 million.

    Successfully defended Carlson Companies against a competitor's tortious interference with contract action and obtained judgment on the pleadings. The lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. 

    Successfully represented Carlson Companies in an insurance coverage dispute against Royal Indemnity Company and National Union Fire Insurance Company to recover the cost of defending two high-stakes patent infringement suits. 

    **Past results are reported to provide the reader with an indication of the type of litigation in which we practice and does not and should not be construed to create an expectation of result in any other case as all cases are dependent upon their own unique fact situation and applicable law.

  • Community Service

    Show All
    • Board of Trustees, William Mitchell College of Law
  • Publications and Speeches

    Show All

    Publications

    • Successful Partnering Between Inside and Outside Counsel (Pro Bono Chapter)
      Successful Partnering; Thomson Reuters/West (June 2011)
    • Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) and Compelled Quick Peek Productions
      The Sedona Conference Journal, Vol. X (2009)
    • Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b) and Reasonable Diligence
      The Sedona Conference (Spring 2009)
    • Deciding When to Go to Trial
      Inside the Minds: Leading Litigators, Aspatore Books (2002)
    • Eighth Circuit Throws Out Antitrust Conspiracy Claims in Conscious Parallelism Case
      The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel (June 2000)
    • Computer Animation Tutors Jury In Complex Litigation High Tech Graphical Presentation Help The Jury Understand Difficult Issues
      Trial Technology (September 11, 1995)

    Speeches

    • Trends in Patent Jury Trials (Moderator)
      American Intellectual Property Law Association, William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota (August 16, 2011)
    • Litigation Lessons
      Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P., Minneapolis, Minnesota (April 13, 2010)
    • Best Practices Panel
      11th Annual Sedona Conference on Complex Litigation (April 30 - May 1, 2009)
    • Government and Internal Investigations, the Evolving Position of the DOJ, and Selective Waiver (Panel)
      11th Annual Sedona Conference on Complex Litigation, Sedona, Arizona (April 30 - May 1, 2009)
    • Rule 502(d) and the Court's Powers (Panel)
      11th Annual Sedona Conference on Complex Litigation, Sedona, Arizona (April 30 - May 1, 2009)
    • Current Litigation Trends Relevant to Investment Advisers and Mutual Funds
      California '40 Acts Group (January 30, 2009)
    • On the Stand: Are You and Your CEO Prepared to Testify in Court?
      Los Angeles County Bar Association Corporate Law Departments Section, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. and Southwestern Law School, Los Angeles, California (September 9, 2008)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resource Group, Las Vegas, Nevada (October 16-18, 2006)
  • In the News

    Show All

    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Announces Executive Board
    • Wholesale Grocery Suppliers Beat Antitrust Suit
    • Attorneys Selected as 2013 Best Lawyers in America
    • Attorneys Named as "Minnesota Super Lawyers and Rising Stars 2012"
    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Earns National Recognition and Gold Ranking in Minnesota in 2012 IAM Patent 1000
    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Ranks First for Litigation in Minnesota in Chambers USA 2012
    • Triple Threat
    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Ranks Prominently in Annual Benchmark Litigation Survey
    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Partners Named Minneapolis Best Lawyers “Lawyers of the Year”
    • Best Lawyers 2012 Names Firm Partners
    • Vault Survey Ranks Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. #1 for Pro Bono
    • Attorneys Named as "Minnesota Super Lawyers and Rising Stars 2011"
    • Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Attorneys Ranked Among World-Class Patent Litigators
    • Medtronic Didn't Infringe BSC Defibrillator IP: Judge
    • Martin R. Lueck is Minnesota’s Top Super Lawyer 2010
    • Firm’s Partners Selected for Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America
    • Martin R. Lueck Recognized as one of "40 Minnesotans on the Move"
    • Firm Holds Cooking Competition Involving SPAM®
    • Firm Ranked First for Litigation by Chambers USA 2008
    • Martin R. Lueck Inducted into the International Academy of Trial Lawyers
    • Minority Corporate Counsel Association Honors Diversity Initiatives of Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P.
    • Firm Ranked First for Litigation by Chambers USA
    • Law Firm Profile: Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P.
    • Firm's Partner, Martin R. Lueck, Admitted to American College of Trial Lawyers
    • Chambers USA Ranks Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. First for Litigation in Minnesota
    • Winning - Successful Trial Strategies from 10 of the Nation's Top Litigators: Martin R. Lueck, Conveying the thrill of invention
    • Martin R. Lueck is Named Winning Attorney by National Law Journal
    • Terry Wade and Marty Lueck Among Minnesota Lawyer’s Attorneys of the Year for 2003
    • Jury Awards Honeywell in Patent Infringement Case
  • Client Extranet
  • Alumni
  • Site Map
  • Legal Notice
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • 800.553.9910
    • linkedin
    • rss

Firm

  • Offices
  • Selected Matters
  • Rankings & Recognition
  • Trial Practice Center

Lawyers

Services

    • Antitrust and Trade Regulation
    • Business Litigation
    • Class Action Litigation
    • Clean Technology
    • Client Technology Services
    • Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
    • Construction
    • Corporate Finance and Securities
    • Corporate Governance and Special Situations
    • Creditor Representation - Insolvency
    • Electronic Discovery
    • Employment
    • Entertainment and Media Litigation
    • Estate Trust and Succession Planning and Administration and Related Litigation
    • Financial and Economic Consultants
    • Franchise and Dealership
    • Government and Internal Investigations
    • Health Care Litigation
    • Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
    • Intellectual Property Litigation
    • International Arbitration
    • International Trade Commission
    • Investigative Services
    • Legal Nurse Consultants
    • Life Sciences and Hatch-Waxman Intellectual Property Litigation
    • Mass Tort Attorneys
    • Medical Malpractice Attorneys
    • Mergers and Acquisitions
    • Paralegals
    • Patent Office Trials
    • Personal Injury Attorneys
    • Real Estate Litigation
    • Science Advisors
    • Securities and Financial Litigation
    • Strategic IP Monetization
    • Trademark Infringement Litigation
    • Trial Support
  • Diversity
  • Careers
  • Publications
  • Offices
  • Contact

© Copyright 2013 Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. All Rights Reserved. Attorney Advertising. Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome.