• Experience

    Ronald J. Schutz is the Chair of the National IP Litigation Group, Regional Managing Partner of the New York office, and a member of the firm's Executive Board. Mr. Schutz is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and is listed in The Best Lawyers in America. He has also been named by Lawdragon as one of the 500 Leading Lawyers in America and by Intellectual Asset Magazine as one of the 300 Leading IP Strategists in the world. In 2008 the National Law Journal named Mr. Schutz to its annual list of the Top 10 Winning Litigators in the United States. Mr. Schutz is a frequent lecturer and author on topics related to litigation and trials and he is often quoted in the business and legal press. He has also appeared on the NBC Nightly News and the CBS Morning News.

    Mr. Schutz has extensive trial experience. Among his significant jury verdicts are the following: $110 million (Fonar v. GE); $66 million (Grantley v. Clear Channel); $35 million (St. Clair v. Canon); $25 million (St. Clair v. Sony); and $8 Million (Personal Audio v. Apple).

    Mr. Schutz is extensively involved in community and public affairs. He is a former Chair and current board member of the Center of the American Experiment. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Guthrie Theater and the YMCA of the Greater Twin Cities. He is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Minnesota Law Review, the William Mitchell Law School Intellectual Property Institute, and the St. Thomas Law School Journal of Law and Public Policy. Mr. Schutz is also a past president of the University of Minnesota Law School Alumni Association. He is also the most recent past Chair of the Minnesota Commission on Judicial Selection (appointed by Governor Pawlenty). In 2010 Campaigns & Elections Magazine named Mr. Schutz one of the 100 most influential people in Minnesota politics. Mr. Schutz also served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Pawlenty for President (2011-2012).

    Mr. Schutz attended Marquette University on an ROTC Scholarship where he graduated magna cum laude with a degree in Mechanical Engineering. Mr. Schutz graduated with honors from the University of Minnesota Law School where he was a member of the Law Review. After law school he fulfilled his military obligation by serving four years in the United States Army JAG Corps stationed with the 7th Infantry Division where he tried twenty jury trials.

    Mr. Schutz is married to his high school sweetheart Janet and they have three adult children. Mr. Schutz enjoys running triathlons and participating in other outdoor adventure sports and activities.

  • Recognition*

    Show All
    • Named an “IP Star,” IP Stars (2013)
    • Listed as a “Recommended Individual for Litigation and Licensing (Minnesota),” and “Top National Plaintiff Patent Lawyer,” IAM 1000: The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners (2012)
    • Named a “Life Science Star,” LMG Life Sciences (2012)
    • Listed in IAM Strategy 300 – The World’s Leading IP Strategists (2012)
    • Listed in IAM250 – World Leading IP Strategists (2011)
    • “Minneapolis Intellectual Property Lawyer of the Year,” Best Lawyers (2011)
    • Named a “Litigation Star,” Benchmark Litigation(2011-2013 editions)
    • “Minneapolis Intellectual Property Lawyer of the Year,” Best Lawyers (2010)
    • Ranked #1 in Minnesota for Litigation: Intellectual Property in Chambers USA (2008-2012)
    • Listed in “500 Leading Lawyers in America,” Lawdragon (2010-2012)
    • Named on the list of the “Top 10 Super Lawyers,” Super Lawyers (2009 and 2012)
    • Listed in IAM250 – World Leading IP Strategists (2009)
    • Recipient of the “Distinguished Alumni Award,” Minnesota Law Review (2009)
    • Named a “Top 10 Winning Attorney,” by The National Law Journal (2008)
    • Fellow, American College of Trial Lawyers
    • Named to “3000 Leading Plaintiffs’ Lawyers in America,” Lawdragon (2007)
    • Named by Super Lawyers as one of the “Top 100 Minnesota Super Lawyers” (2006-2012)
    • According to Chambers USA’s profile “Ron Schutz’s trial experience has earned him a reputation as ‘one of the most successful IP lawyers in the country.’  Schutz, chair of the firm’s IP litigation department, has won a series of huge victories running to hundreds of millions of dollars.”
    • Included in The Best Lawyers in America Eleventh Edition to the present
    • Named by Minnesota Lawyer as one of its “Attorneys of the Year” (2004)
    • Named a “Minnesota Super Lawyer in Intellectual Property Litigation,” Super Lawyers (2003-2012) 

     
    *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

    SELECTED TRIAL RESULTS 

    Trial Counsel in Fonar Corporation v. General Electric, a patent infringement case in which a federal jury in New York awarded Fonar Corporation $110.5 million. The National Law Journal listed this case as the seventh largest jury verdict of any type in 1995. The case was affirmed on appeal in the amount of $103 million and was cited by IP Worldwide as the largest patent jury verdict ever upheld on appeal at the time. Fonar Corporation v. General Electric Co., 107 F.3d 1543 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 266 (1997).

    Trial Counsel in Grantley Patent Holdings, Inc. v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc., a patent infringement case in which a federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas awarded Grantley Corporation, Mr. Schutz’s client, $66 million.  The jury found that Clear Channel Communications, Inc. infringed on four of Grantley Corporation’s patents related to an integrated inventory management system for radio advertising time.  The jury also found that the infringement was willful.  The verdict was announced on April 22, 2008.   On June 11, 2008, the court enhanced the damages by more than $16.5 million, awarded prejudgment interest and entered judgment totaling more than $89 million.  The case settled while on appeal under confidential terms.

    Trial Counsel in St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v. Canon, Inc. et al., No. 03-241 (D. Del., filed February 28, 2003) a case in which a federal jury in Wilmington, Delaware awarded Mr. Schutz's client, St. Clair, $34.7 million after a finding that Canon infringed four patents relating to digital camera technology.  The verdict was announced on October 8, 2004. Trial Counsel in St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v. Sony Corp. et al., No. 01-557 (D. Del., filed Aug. 14, 2001) a case in which a federal jury in Wilmington, Delaware awarded the client, St. Clair, $25 million after a finding that Sony infringed four patents relating to digital camera technology.  The verdict was announced on February 25, 2003.  The parties entered into a license agreement two days later, the terms of which are confidential.

    Trial Counsel in St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v. Fuji, Ltd. et al., No. 03-241 (D. Del., filed February 28, 2003) a case in which a federal jury in Wilmington, Delaware awarded Mr. Schutz's client, St. Clair, $3 million after a finding that Fuji infringed four patents relating to digital camera technology. The verdict was announced on October 25, 2004.  After a long and tortured post-trial history the verdict was reversed by the Federal Circuit on a claim construction issue.

    Trial Counsel in Personal Audio LLC v. Apple Inc., a patent infringement case in which a Texas federal jury awarded our client, Personal Audio LLC, $8 million in damages after finding that Apple's iPods infringed our client's patent for an audio player that can download or receive navigable playlists.  The verdict was announced on July 8, 2011. The court also awarded prejudgment interest in the amount of $4,182,331 for a total judgment of $12,182,331. 

    Trial Counsel in LaserMaster Corporation v. Sentinel Imaging resulted in jury verdict of $2.2 million in a trade secret misappropriation case.  Retained as trial counsel only five weeks before trial.  LaserMaster Corporation v. Sentinel Imaging, Civ. No. 4-96-746 (D. Minn. 1997).

    Trial Counsel in Carlson Marketing Group, Inc. et al. v. SME Associates, et al., Case No. CT 02-012914 (D.Ct. Minn. 2002); represented Carlson in an action against SME and its principals for theft of trade secrets relating to Carlson's Olympic hospitality business for the 2004 Summer Games in Athens. Obtained a temporary injunction and later a settlement including a permanent injunction.

    SELECTED APPELLATE RESULTS

    Lead Trial and Appellate Counsel in Imation Corp. v. Koninklijke Philips Elec. N.V., et al., 586 F.3d 980 (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.

    Lead Trial and Appellate Counsel in Luigino's, Inc. v. Robert Peterson and IBP, a case in which Mr. Schutz represented Robert Peterson, the CEO of IBP, and the company, in the defense of a $500 million theft of trade secret, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract case.  The District Court dismissed the case on a motion for summary judgment shortly before trial, a decision that was affirmed on appeal.  Luigino's, Inc. v. Peterson et al., 317 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 2003).

    Represented plaintiff Andersen Corporation in overturning a District Court decision granting the defendants' summary judgment and finding that claims of the asserted patent were invalid as obvious. The Federal Circuit's decision was one of the first post-KSR District Court findings of obviousness to be reversed by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' petition for certioriari. 2007-1536, 2008-WL4927431, (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2008), cert. denied.

    Trial and Appellate Counsel in Fonar Corporation v. General Electric, a patent infringement case in which a federal jury in New York awarded Fonar Corporation $110.5 million. The National Law Journal listed this case as the seventh largest jury verdict of any type in 1995. The case was affirmed on appeal in the amount of $103 million and was cited by IP Worldwide as the largest patent jury verdict ever upheld on appeal at the time. Fonar Corporation v. General Electric Co., 107 F.3d 1543 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 266 (1997).

    SELECTED CASES THAT SETTLED OR RESOLVED PRIOR TO TRIAL

    St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. Digital Camera Patent Litigation (D. Del.).  Represented St. Clair in a series of patent infringement suits involving digital camera technology that started in 2002.  Three of those cases proceeded to trial and resulted in verdicts of $34.7 million, $25 million, and $3 million.  (Further details on these three verdicts above.)  Settlements were reached prior to trials with the following defendants:  Olympus, Nikon, Minolta, Seiko-Epson, Kodak, JVC, Panasonic, Kyocera, Samsung, Sanyo, Casio, Pentax, LG, BenQ, Concord, General Imaging Co., and Pantech.  Settlements were reached after trials with Sony and Canon.  Total settlements in this litigation have exceeded $240 million.

    Fonar Corporation MRI Patent Litigation.  Represented Fonar Corporation in a series of patent infringement cases in New York, Delaware, and California related to MRI technology.   After a jury verdict against General Electric for $110 million in the Eastern District of New York all of the other cases eventually settled.  The settling defendants included:  Siemens, Philips, Toshiba, Hitachi, Shimadzu, Health Images, and Elscint.  Total settlements and royalties in the enforcement of the Fonar patents was over $200 million.

    TVI v. Microsoft, (N.D. Calif.).   Represented TVI in a patent infringement case involving technology related to the auto play function of Windows.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    General Mills, Inc. v. Conagra, Inc. (D. Minn.).  Represented General Mills in a patent infringement case involving microwave popcorn technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    General Mills, Inc. v. Rhodes Bake-N-Serv; Rhodes International (D. Minn.).  Represented General Mills in a patent infringement case involving food products.  Case settled prior to trial a confidential amount.

    General Mills, Inc. v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc. (D. Minn.).  Represented General Mills in a patent infringement and breach of contract case involving rolled fruit products.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.  See 487 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and 495 F.3d. 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

    General Mills, Inc. v. Hom/Ade Foods (E.D. Texas).  Represented General Mills in a patent infringement case involving food products.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    General Mills v. Farley (D. Minn.).  Represented General Mills in a patent infringement action involving rolled fruit products.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Fargo Electronics, Inc. v. Magnacolor, et al.  (D. Minn.).  Represented Fargo in a patent case involving printer technology. Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Fargo Electronics, Inc. v. Sony Chemicals (D. Minn.).  Represented Fargo in a patent infringement case involving printer technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Fargo Electronics v. Iris Ltd., Inc. (D. Minn.).  Represented Fargo in a patent infringement case involving printer technology.  Case settled prior to trial.

    Edge Specialists v. Citadel (N.D. Ill.).  Represented Edge in a patent infringement case related to automated derivative trading.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Manufacturing Administration & Management (MAMS) v. ICT Group,  212 F.R.D. 110 (E.D.N.Y. 2002).   Represented MAMS in a patent infringement case related to call center technology that settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Drexler Technology Corporation v. Sony Corporation and Dolby Laboratories, (N.D. Calif.).  Represented Drexler in a patent infringement case involving audio on film technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Collins Associates v. Object Design, Inc. (D. Mass.)  Represented Collins Associates in a breach of contract action involving an enterprise level software installation.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Netcentives v. Carlson Companies, Inc. (N.D. Calif.).  Represented Carlson in the defense of a patent infringement case.  Case settled prior to trial.

    Schwan's Shared Services, LLC v. McGill Technology Limited  (D. Mich.).  Represented Schwan's in a patent infringement case involving food processing equipment.  Case settled prior to trial.

    PointDX Inc. v. Voxar, Inc. (M.D. N.C.).  Represented PointDX in a patent infringement case involving virtual colonoscopy technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Hark Chan (Techsearch LLC) v. Intuit, Symantec, Electronic Arts (N.D. Calif.).  Represented Mr. Chan in a patent infringement case involving hyperlink technology.  Case settled prior to trial.

    BTG International, Inc. v. Amazon.com, et al. (D. Del.).  Represented BTG in a patent infringement case involving e-commerce technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    LP Matthews LLC v. Bath & Body Works, et al. (D. Del.).   Represented LP Matthews in a patent infringement case related to cosmetics.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Internet Media Corporation v. Dell, et al. (D. Del.).  Represented Internet Media in a patent infringement case involving e-commerce technology against several defendants.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Ag-Chem Equipment Co. v. Tyler Industries (D.Minn.).  Represented Tyler in the defense of a patent infringement case involving GPS guided fertilizer spreaders.  Case settled prior to trial.

    Storer v. Hayes, 995 F.Supp. 185 (D. Mass. 1998).  Represented James Storer in a patent infringement case involving computer technology.  Case settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.

    Display Solutions v. Daktronics, 983 F. Supp. 1476 (N.D. Ga. 1997).  Represented Daktronics in the defense of a patent infringement action.  Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement.  Case proceeded to trial on Daktronics' declaratory judgment claims resulting in a finding that the patent was invalid.  178 F.R.D. 626 (N.D. Ga. 1997).

    Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing v. Rauh Rubber, 943. F. Supp. 1117 (D. Minn. 1996), affirmed 130 F.3d 1305 (8th Cir. 1997).  Represented 3M in a trademark infringement case.  Obtained a preliminary injunction.

    **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
    • Center of the American Experiment, Board of Directors, Former Chair
    • YMCA of the Greater Twin Cities, Board of Directors
    • Guthrie Theater, Board of Directors William Mitchell College of Law IP Institute, Board of Advisors
    • Minnesota Academy for Conservative Leadership, Board of Advisors  
    • Republican National Lawyers Association (Life Member)
    • University of Minnesota Law Alumni Association, President (2002-2003)
    • Northwest Suburbs Cable Communication Commission (1987-1989)

  • Publications and Speeches

    Show All

    Publications

    • Courtroom developments and their impact on patent monetisation
      2012 IP Monetisation (October 2012)
    • Debate Continues Over Paid-in-Full Patent Awards
      The National Law Journal (December 12, 2011)
    • Non-Practicing Entities and Permanent Injunctions Post-eBay
      The Sedona Conference Journal, Vol. 12 (Fall 2011)
    • Unchartered Waters: Determining Ongoing Royalties for Victorious Patent Holders Denied an Injunction
      The Sedona Conference Journal, Vol. XI (Fall 2010) (with Patrick Arenz)
    • Proving Willful Infringement Post-Seagate: Don't Divorce the Willfulness Analysis from its Tort Foundations as an Intent Inquiry
      The Sedona Conference Journal, Vol. X (Fall 2009) (with Brenda Joly)
    • You Can Run But You Can't Hide - 271(a) Goes Wireless.
      Intellectual Property Today (June 2005) (co-authored)
    • Case Management Issues in Patent Litigation
      The Sedona Conference Journal (Fall 2004) (with Jonathan Goins)
    • Graphics Shed Light on Complex IP Cases
      The National Law Journal (July 16, 2011) (with Alex Treibitz, CEO of Z-Axis Corp.)
    • Strategies for Patent Holders Contemplating Litigation
      Managing Intellectual Property: Patent Yearbook (1999)
    • 'Step-Plus-Function' At Last Revisited
      The National Law Journal (May 24, 1999) (co-authored)
    • Are You "Ready for Patenting?" Pfaff And The New On-Sale Bar Test
      (April 26, 1999)
    • If You Snooze, Do You Lose Your Right to Sue?
      The National Law Journal (October, 19, 1998) (co-authored)
    • The Patent Files
      Chief Executive (June 1998) (co-authored)
    • On Sale Bar Requires a More Complete Invention
      The National Law Journal (June 16, 1997) (with Darren Schwiebert)
    • Vitronics Sets Road Map for Patent Construction
      The National Law Journal (October 28, 1996) (with Darren Schwiebert)
    • Educating the Jury: The Multimedia Way
      New York Law Journal, p. S4 (October 23, 1995)
    • Computer Animation Tutors Jury
      The National Law Journal, p. C1 (September 11, 1995)
    • Trade Dress Protection Expanded
      Outside Counsel (Winter 1994)

    Book Chapters

    • From Assets to Profits, Chapter 9: Patent Litigation: The Changing Economics of Risk and Return, Edited by Bruce Berman (Wiley 2009)
    • Patent Enforcement Best Practices, Chapter 6: Making the Client Aware of All the Angles (Aspatore Books 2007)
    • Making Innovation Pay, Chapter 9: It Takes More Than Being Right to Win a Patent Dispute, Edited by Bruce Berman (Wiley 2006)
    • Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook, 2d Ed., Chapter 10: Interrogatories and Requests for Admissions, Edited by Berry L. Grossman and Gary M. Hoffman (BNA Books 2005)

    Speeches

    • Balancing the Equities and Interests: Do Defendants Really Want to Go It Alone? (Panelist)
      Eastern District of Texas Bar Association, Plano, Texas (October 26, 2012)
    • Case Management Post-AIA; Damages and Remedies; Claim Construction; Discovery; Expert Issues (Panelist)
      Thirteenth Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation, Del Mar, California (October 11-12, 2012)
    • Using AFA for Cost Effective Management of Patent Litigation
      Digital Sandbox Network, New York, New York (March 14-16, 2012)
    • Trends Inside the Courtroom: What Every Licensing Professional Should Know
      LES, Anaheim, California (March 13, 2012)
    • The America Invents Act: Litigation Changes
      Minnesota CLE, Minneapolis, Minnesota (October 17, 2011)
    • Transforming Our Trade Agenda For The Innovation Economy
      Panel Member, Minnesota High Tech Association (August 31, 2011)
    • Minnesota Chapter of the Federal Bar Association Panel Presentation on Patent Jury Trials
      Minneapolis, MN (April 29, 2011)
    • Post Verdict Issues: Injunctions, Royalties & Contempt Proceedings (Panelist)
      The 11th Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation, Phoenix, Arizona (October 21-22, 2010)
    • Judicial Diversity and the Selection Process: A Panel Discussion
      Minnesota Defense Lawyers Association and Minnesota Association for Justice, Stillwater, Minnesota (June 25, 2010)
    • Declaratory Judgment and Related Matters in Patent Litigation Webinar
      IP Chat Channel (February 25, 2010)
    • Litigating with an Acquired Patent Proving that Trolls are Really Warm Fuzzy Creatures
      AIPLA, La Quinta, California (January 29, 2010)
    • Tenth Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation
      The Sedona Conference Institute, Hilton Sedona Resort & Spa, Sedona, Arizona (October 22-23, 2009)
    • Case Study: Ensuring Optimum Efficiency when Litigation Work is Outsourced
      American Conference Institute's LPO Summit, New York, New York (February 23-24, 2009)
    • First Chair Forum for Private Practitioners and First Chair Forum for In-House Counsel
      2008 Midwest Intellectual Property Institute, Minnesota CLE Conference Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota (September 25-26, 2008)
    • Avoiding the Potential Pitfalls in Litigation Where Work has Been Outsourced
      American Conference Institute, LPO Summit, New York, New York (September 15-16, 2008)
    • The Role of IP Litigation
      Incremental Advantage, Managing Intellectual Property for Maximum Returns Conference, San Francisco, California (July 16, 2008)
    • Demystifying Judicial Appointments
      Minnesota State Bar Association, Duluth, Minnesota (June 16, 2008)
    • The 20th Annual General Counsel Conference (Panelist)
      Corporate Counsel, New York, New York (June 9-10, 2008)
    • Licensing Portfolio Monetization and the Future of Contingency Fee Patent Litigation
      8th Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute, San Jose, California (November 28, 2007)
    • Gunfight at the IP Coral: World Class Trial Lawyers Demonstrate How to Win a Bet the Company Case
      AIPLA, Boston, Massachusetts (May 9, 2007)
    • Strategies for Managing Intellectual Property Litigation
      IncreMental Advantage, The Harvard Club, New York City, New York (February 28, 2007)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Caesar's Palace, Las Vegas, Nevada (October 16-18, 2006)
    • Adopting a Theme for Your Case
      The ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law, Redwood City (San Francisco), California (September 28, 2006)
    • Seventh Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation
      The Sedona Conference Institute, Hilton Sedona Resort & Spa, Sedona, Arizona (October 12-13, 2006)
    • Financing IP Litigation
      The Wall Street Transcript, San Francisco, California (July 20-21, 2006)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Hyatt Regency Coconut Point, Bonita Springs, Florida (April 6-8, 2006)
    • Patent Litigation: Big Changes on the Horizon
      Inventors Network, Minneapolis, Minnesota (February 21, 2006)
    • Sixth Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation
      Sedona, Arizona (October 27-28, 2005)
    • Patent Litigation: Big Changes on the Horizon
      Association for Corporate Growth-Silicon Valley Chapter, Los Altos Hills, California (October 13, 2005)
    • What Should IP Laws Protect Going Forward?
      ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law, ABA Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois (August 6, 2005)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa, Bonita Springs, Florida (April 17-19, 2005)
    • Licensing and Negotiation Strategies: The Litigator's Perspective
      AIPLA 28th Mid-Winter Institute, Orlando, Florida (January 26, 2005)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, The Registry Resort, Naples, Florida (April 22-24, 2004)
    • Managing the Gladiators-Surviving Patent Litigation
      AUTM 2004 Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Texas (March 6, 2004)
    • Patent Litigation: Taking on the Corporate Infringer
      William Mitchell Chapter of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy, St. Paul, Minnesota (February 23, 2004)
    • Patent Litigation IV
      The Sedona Conference, Radisson Poco Diablo, Sedona, Arizona (November 20-21, 2003)
    • Contingent Fee IP Litigation: Are Potential Rewards Worth the Risks?
      2003 Midwest Intellectual Property Institute, Hyatt Regency Hotel, Minneapolis Minnesota (September 18-19, 2003)
    • Patent Strategies 2003
      FindLaw Corporate Counsel Center, Glasser Legal Works, Stanford University, Stanford, California (June 9, 2003)
    • Patent Strategies 2003
      Glasser Legal Works, Boston Harbor Hotel, Boston, Massachusetts (April 29, 2003)
    • Basic Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, The Registry Resort, Naples, Florida (May 2-3, 2002)
    • Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa, Bonita Springs, Florida (April 17-19, 2005)
    • Managing the Gladiators-Surviving Patent Litigation
      AUTM 2002 Annual Meeting, San Diego, California (February 28-March 2, 2002)
    • Patent Litigation: Taking on the Corporate Infringer
      William Mitchell Chapter of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy, St. Paul, Minnesota (February 23, 2004)
    • Handling Intellectual Property Issues in Business Transactions-Due Diligence in Intellectual Property Transactions
      Practicing Law Institute, Pentagon City, Virginia (February 11-12, 2002)
    • Corporate Counsel-Keeping Ahead of the Game in 2002
      Minnesota Institute of Legal Education, Calhoun Beach Club, Minneapolis, Minnesota (January 30, 2002)
    • Demonstrative Evidence-Using Evidence Throughout a Trial
      Minnesota Institute of Legal Education, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (January 15, 2002)
    • Patent Litigation
      The Sedona Conference, Sedona, Arizona (November 15-16, 2001)
    • Basic Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Westin Innisbrook Resort, Tampa Bay, Florida (April 22-24, 2001)
    • Handling Intellectual Property in Business Transactions
      Practicing Law Institute, Tyson's Corner, Virginia (February 12-13, 2001)
    • Patent Litigation
      The Sedona Conference, Sedona Arizona (November 9-20, 2000)
    • Key Issues Facing Boards of Directors: Strategic Intellectual Property Portfolio Management
      The Directors Roundtable, Hotel Intercontinental, Los Angeles, California (October 4, 2000)
    • Key Issues Facing Boards of Directors: Strategic Intellectual Property Portfolio Management
      The Directors Roundtable, Radisson Plaza Hotel, Minneapolis, Minnesota (September 22, 2000)
    • The Trial Lawyer's Approach to Winning Patent Cases
      The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, Illinois (September 7, 2000)
    • Basic Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, The Registry Resort, Naples, Florida (April 13-15, 2000)
    • Basic Patent Infringement Litigation
      Patent Resources Group, Ritz Carlton, Rancho Mirage, California (October 13-15, 1999)
    • Trade Secrets
      Minnesota Institute of Legal Education, Marriott City Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota (January 12, 1999)
    • Preparing the Trial Theme From Day One
      1999 National CLE Conference-Intellectual Property Law, Vail, Colorado (January 12, 1999)
    • Business Implications of Recent Patent Infringement Cases
      Annual Meeting of the Licensing Executives Society, The Fountainebleau Hilton, Miami Beach, Florida (October 26, 1998)
    • Courtroom Technology Trying Civil and Criminal Cases in New Ways
      Suffolk Academy of Law, Hauppauge, New York (October 19, 1998)
    • Valuation of Intellectual Capital
      ICM Conferences, Marriott Marquis Hotel, New York, New York (September 17, 1998)
    • Valuation of Intellectual Capital
      ICM Conferences, Park Hyatt Hotel, Los Angeles, California (August 26, 1998)
    • Using Technology in Litigation
      Minnesota State Bar Association CLE, Minneapolis, Minnesota (February 20, 1998)
    • Preparing for and Winning the $100 Million Patent Case
      1998 National CLE Conference-Intellectual Property Law, Vail, Colorado (January 6-10, 1998)
    • Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights
      Directors Roundtable Conference for Corporate Counsel, Harvard Club, New York, New York (October 30, 1997)
    • Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights
      Directors Roundtable National Conference for Corporate Counsel, Stamford, Connecticut (October 30, 1997)
    • Case Study of Patent Infringement Damages From Beginning to End
      Law & Politics Intellectual Property Damages Seminar, Minneapolis Athletic Club, Minneapolis, Minnesota (May 5, 1997)
    • Organizing the Trial for Successful Jury Trials in Patent and High Tech Litigation
      American Conference Institute, Park Lane Hotel, New York, New York (May 1-2, 1997)
    • Demonstrative Evidence
      Minnesota Institute of Legal Education, Bloomington Marriott Hotel, Bloomington, Minnesota (January 31, 1997)
    • Pretrial Planning and Strategy in the $100 Million Patent Case
      1997 National CLE Conference on Intellectual Property Law, Law Education Institute, Inc. and The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Vail, Colorado (January 13-19, 1997)
    • How to Introduce and Use Exhibits in the Courtroom
      Minnesota State Bar Association CLE, Minnesota Law Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota (October 29, 1996)
    • Trial Skills Seminar-Demonstrative and Computer Evidence
      Minnesota State Bar Association CLE, Minnesota Law Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota (June 13, 1996)
    • Analysis of Fonar v. General Electric, Including Litigation Trends and Tactics
      Law & Politics Intellectual Property Law CLE, Minneapolis Athletic Club, Minneapolis, Minnesota (May 20, 1996)
    • Patent Malpractice: Avoiding, Defending Against, and Asserting
      Patent Resources Group, The Registry Resort, Naples, Florida (April 25-27, 1996)
    • Organizing the Conduct of the Trial for Success
      The American Conference Institute Seminar on Jury Trials in Patent and High Tech Litigation, Hotel Nikko, Chicago, Illinois (April 22-23, 1996)
    • High Stakes-High Tech Intellectual Property Trials Course Chair
      Minnesota Institute of Continuing Legal Education, Bloomington Marriott Hotel, Bloomington, Minnesota (April 12, 1996)
    • Pitfalls in IP Practice That Lead to Allegations of Malpractice
      ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law Eleventh Annual Spring Educational Programs, Washington National Airport Hilton, Arlington, Virginia (April 11, 1996)
    • Strategic Considerations and the Interplay Between Licensing and Litigation
      Licensing Executives Society Luncheon Meeting, Minneapolis Athletic Club, Minneapolis, Minnesota (November 2, 1995)
    • How to Work with and Prepare Expert Witnesses in Federal Court Commercial Litigation to Support a $110 Million Verdict
      Minnesota Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, Minneapolis Athletic Club, Minneapolis, Minnesota (October 18, 1995)
    • Patent Litigation
      Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association CLE at the 1995 Minnesota State Bar Association Convention, Bloomington, Minnesota (June 22, 1995)
    • Pretrial Strategies
      Intellectual Property Litigation Seminar, Minnesota State Bar Association Continuing Legal Education, Minneapolis, Minnesota (February 10, 1995)

  • In the News

    Show All
    • NBC Nightly News
    • CBS Morning News
    • The Detroit Free Press
    • "Big Deals: TiVo v. Verizon," American Lawyer  (December 2012)

    Quoted in:
    • The New York Times
    • The National Law Journal
    • Newsday
    • The American Lawyer
    • Chief Financial Officer
    • The Minneapolis Star Tribune
    • The St. Paul Pioneer Press
    • City Business
    • Twin Cities Business Monthly
    • The Fairfield County Business Journal
    • Minnesota Lawyer

  • Video and Audio Clips

    Show All