Find Lawyers

;

Professional Honors and Recognitions

• Named a Leading Lawyer in the Field of Intellectual Property by Chambers USA Guide: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business (2010 to 2012)
• Listed in Best Lawyers in America
• Top Rated Lawyers®-AV® Preeminent in Intellectual Property law by Martindale-Hubbell
• Named an Ohio “Super Lawyer” in Intellectual Property Litigation (2012 to 2013)

Recent Speaking Engagements and Presentations

• “Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) Patent Owners and the Developing Law,” Information Technology Law Institute 2012: Innovations in Apps, E-books, Cybersecurity, Mobile Technology, Privacy and Social Media (April 2012)
• “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum,” speech on forum shopping in patent cases at the University of Dayton Intellectual Property 21st Annual Intellectual Property Seminar (June 2011)
• “New Standard for Computer-Implemented Means-Plus-Function Claims?” co-presented with Matthew P. Hayden to the Cincinnati Bar Association, Intellectual Property Litigation Committee (April 2011)
• Southern District of Ohio Patent Local Rules, presented to Columbus Federal Bar Association CLE (January 2011)
• Southern District of Ohio and Northern District of Ohio Patent Local Rules, presented to Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association (December 2010)
• Southern District of Ohio Patent Local Rules, presented to Dayton Federal Bar Association CLE (December 2010)
• Southern District of Ohio Patent Local Rules, presented to the Third Annual Quad City Symposium for CincyIP, DIPLA, TIPLA, CIPLA and the University of Dayton School of Law (July 2010)

Representative Patent Litigation

• In the Matter of Certain Computer Forensic Devices and Products Containing the Same, International Trade Commission, Case No. 337-TA-799. Defended accused infringer, Guidance Software, against patent claims related to computer forensics technologies—finding of no violation after trial in August 2012.
• Patent Harbor, LLC v. Audiovox Corporation, ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00361. Defended Funai Corp, accused infringer, against patent claims related to DVD scene selection menus. Settled on confidential terms after jury trial in December 2012.
• Huhtamaki, Inc. v. PWP Industries, Inc., SD Ohio, Case No. 1:09-cv-795. Declaratory Judgment action: Representing PWP Industries—patent owner against alleged infringer related to food packaging technology. Jury trial in January 2013—settled after jury impaneled on confidential terms.
• Oatey v. IPS Corp., ND Ohio, Case No. 1:03-cv-01231. Patent Infringement: Obtained summary judgment of invalidity based on obviousness for accused infringer, IPS Corp.
• Ultratech, Inc. v. Tamarack Scientific Co., Inc., ND California, Case No. 3:03-cv-03235. Patent Infringement: Obtained summary judgment of invalidity for accused infringer, Tamarack Scientific.
• Independent Ink v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., Supreme Court, Case No. 04-1329. Patent infringement and antitrust: Represented patent owner and accused infringer, Independent Ink. (All claims other than antitrust case settled on confidential terms). Antitrust case went to United States Supreme Court. The District Court had previously granted summary judgment to defendants. The case was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The CAFC reversed in favor of Independent Ink. Independent Ink v. Illinois Tool Works, CAFC, Case No. 2004-1196. The Supreme Court then reversed the doctrine of presumed market power in a patented product, in tying cases, but agreed that the presumption of market power over a tied product should remain intact if there is market power in the tying product, in the tying product market.
• TV Interactive Data Corporation v. Sony Corporation, et. al., ND California, Case No. 5:10-cv-00475. Represented the Funai entities against patent claims related to DVD technology (case settled on confidential terms).
• Terry Asphalt Materials, Inc. v. Blacklidge Emulsions, Inc., SD Ohio, Case No. 1:2009-cv-00553. Represented Blacklidge, alleged infringer of patent related to asphalt emulsion technology (case settled on confidential terms).
• Kroger Co. v. Ateb, SD Ohio, Case No. 1:2009-cv-00196. Represented Kroger in dispute over indemnity obligations arising from patent case (case settled on confidential terms).
• Lantronix, Inc. v. Digi International, Inc., CD California, Case No. 8:2004-cv-00513. Represented Lantronix, patent owner, against alleged infringer related to USB devices (case settled on confidential terms).
• Digi International, Inc. v. Lantronix, Inc., CD California, Case No. 0:2004-cv-01560. Represented Lantronix, alleged infringer or patent related to USB devices (case settled on confidential terms).
• Buztronics v. Lightcubes, SD Indiana, Case No. 1:2008-cv-01685. Declaratory Judgment action: Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to consumer LED goods (case settled on confidential terms).
• Intellectual Property Holdings, LLC et al v. Wescast (USA) Inc. et al., ND Ohio, Case No. 1:2008-cv-00418. Represented patent owner against alleged infringers related to automotive parts (case settled on confidential terms).
• Medversant Technologies, LLC v. Morrisey Associates, Inc., CD California Case No. 2:09-cv-05031. Represented patent owner against alleged infringers related to medical practitioner verification technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Cincinnati Bell Inc. v. Traffic Information LLC, Oregon, Case No. 3:10-cv-01453. Represented Cincinnati Bell, Inc., alleged infringer of patents related to technologies for monitoring traffic information (case settled on confidential terms).
• EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00379. Represented Cincinnati Bell, Inc., alleged infringer against patent claims related to interactive video networks (case settled on confidential terms).
• Arrivalstar S.A. et al v. Trailer Bridge, Inc. et al., MD Florida, Case No. 8:09-cv-01307. Represented Transfair North America, alleged infringer, against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems (case settled on confidential terms).
• Arrivalstar S.A. et al v. Langham Logistics, Inc. et al., SD Indiana, Case No. 1:08-cv-01689. Represented American Transport Exchange, alleged infringer, against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems (case settled on confidential terms).
• Cincinnati Bell, Inc. v. Arrivalstar S.A., SD of Ohio, Case No. 1:11-cv-00274. Declaratory Judgment action: Represented Cincinnati Bell, alleged infringer against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems (case settled on confidential terms).
• GeoTag v. Medicine Shoppe, ED of Texas Case No. 2:11-cv-404. Represented accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• OKI America, Inc. et al. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., ND California Case No. 3:040-cv-003171. Represented the Oki entities, alleged infringer, against patent claims related to semi-conductor technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Electronics for Imaging v. Tesseron, Ltd., ND California, Case No. 5:2007-cv-05534. Declaratory Judgment action: Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to high speed variable printing technologies (declaratory judgment case dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction)
• Tesseron, Ltd. v. Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A., Inc., et al., ND Ohio, Case No. 1:2007-cv-02947 Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to high speed variable printing technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Tesseron, Ltd. v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons, ND Ohio, Case No. 1:2006-cv-2909. Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to high speed variable printing technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Tesseron, Ltd. v. Xerox Corporation, ND Ohio, Case No. 1:2004-cv-02164. Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to high speed variable printing technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Oakley, Inc. v. Nike, Inc., CD California, Case No. 2:01-cv-04102-R-AJW. Represented Nike, Inc., accused infringer against patent claims related to sunglass technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Oakley, Inc. v. Kaenon LLC, CD California, Case No. 8:04-cv-00572-AHS-MLG. Represented Kaenon LLC, accused infringer against patent claims related to sunglass technologies (case settled on confidential terms).
• Arrivalstar S.A. et al v. WTS Paradigm, MD Florida, Case No. 1:2012-cv-23845. Representing WTS Paradigm, alleged infringer, against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems (case ongoing).
• MyKey Technology, Inc. v. Data Protection Solutions by Arco et. al., DC Delaware, Case No. 1:11-cv-00444. Representing Guidance Software, alleged infringer of patents related to computer forensic hardware devices (case ongoing).
• ISwitch, LLC v. Cincinnati Bell Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-118. Representing Cincinnati Bell, Inc., accused infringer, against patent claims related to telephone encryption technologies (case ongoing).
• Swipe Innovations, LLC v. Elavon, Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 9:12-cv-0040. Representing Vantiv LLC., accused infringer, against patent claims related to technologies that allow secure financial transactions (case ongoing).
• Newport Corporation v. Lighthouse Photonics Inc., CD California, Case No. 8:12-cv-00719. Representing Newport Corp., patent owner against alleged infringers related to laser technologies (case ongoing).
• Tesseron, Ltd. v. Punch International NV et al., MD Florida, Case No. 6:10-cv-00909. Representing Tesseron, Ltd. against alleged infringer related to variable data printing technology (case ongoing).
• Info-Hold, Inc. v. Muzak Holdings LLC and Muzak LLC, SD Ohio, Case No. 1:11-cv-283. Representing the Muzak entities, alleged infringers, against patent claims related to programmable messaging system for controlling playback of messages on remote music on-hold (case ongoing).
• Graywire, LLC v. Ciena, et al., ND Georgia, Case No. 1:08-cv-02993. Representing Palomar Technologies, Inc., alleged infringer, against patent claims related to die bonders (case ongoing).

Prior Work Experience

• Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, former partner and Head of the Patent Litigation practice
• Luxottica Retail (LensCrafters, Pearl Vision, Sunglass Hut), led the Legal Services Department
• Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelley, former partner in the Patent and Litigation groups