Steptoe’s patent litigation practice is recognized as among the premier in the country, achieving recognition in publications including Intellectual Asset Magazine’s “Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners” in each of the last two years; Chambers USA and Chambers Global; and Legal 500 US. Our team combines Steptoe’s traditional strength in litigation with an advanced understanding of the technical aspects of the issues at hand, allowing our lawyers to effectively advocate for our clients the trial level, at appeal, at arbitration venues throughout the world, and in front of various regulatory bodies. We are:
Skilled Litigators. The lawyers in our patent litigation practice understand how to prepare a case for trial. We spend the time to develop case themes early, performing pre-litigation investigations on behalf of clients in order to develop the best strategy to attain our client’s business objectives. We hone in on the key issues at hand and combine that with the ability and willingness to take a case to trial. Steptoe lawyers have tried cases to verdicts before judges and juries, and have handled arbitrations before arbitral panels throughout the world. As a result, we put out clients in a strong position to achieve the most favorable result – either at trial, through a summary judgment, or negotiations.
Technically Strong. We combine our advocacy with a substantive and nuanced understanding of the technological issues in dispute. Several lawyers and specialists in our practice have PhDs and masters degrees in such areas as biology, chemistry, chemical engineering, electrical engineering, and mathematics, represent clients in all disciplines of patent law, and have the background to thoroughly understand the intricacies of the technologies at issue in each case. That allows the lawyers on our team to present these often complex issues in a form that a lay judge or jury can understand, so that they can make an informed, and correct, judgment.
Deeply Experienced. We represent a variety of clients, from Fortune 500 corporations, to midsize companies, and small, emerging high-tech ventures, and for them, we litigate cases in a range of industries, including automobile, consumer products, electronics, financial, telecommunications, transportation, and the internet. Our extensive litigation experience means we appear before every significant patent jurisdiction in the country, including US District Courts, the Federal Circuit, and the International Trade Commission (ITC). Several of our IP litigators provide trial and appellate representation of corporations in major patent litigation cases, as well as patent interferences before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and trademark opposition/cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, in the US Patent and Trademark Office.
In addition, we understand that while patent litigation is vital to protecting intellectual property, it is inherently unpredictable and can be an expensive proposition. We recognize our clients’ top priorities, including budgeting, responsiveness, and efficiency. Our experience allows us to handle matters in a cost-effective manner, with lean staffing and cross-office collaboration leading to efficient and complete coverage. We are committed to helping our clients meet their goal of protecting and profiting from patents that represent a significant investment in time and money.
District Court Litigation
- Bluebonnet Telecommunications L.L.C. v. VTech Communications Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2014) - Representing Vtech Communications as lead counsel in a patent infringement suit involving telecommunication products. Bluebonnet accused VTech and numerous others of infringing patents developed by Seimens. The patents were sold by Seimens and allegedly cover various features included in almost every telecommunications product.
- Lamina Packaging Innovations, LLC v. Moët Hennessy USA, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2013) - Represented Moët Hennessy USA, Inc. against allegations of patent infringement regarding the use of laminated packaging for Dom Perignon and Moët Chandon products. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case.
- Technology Innovations LLC v. Amazon.Com Inc. (D. Del. 2011) – Represented Amazon.com Inc., a provider of e-commerce, in a patent litigation suit brought by Technology Innovations LLC regarding patents related to Amazon’s Kindle e-book reader. The matter was originally filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, but was dismissed and re-filed in the District of Delaware after Amazon threatened sanctions in Texas. Amazon's motion for summary judgment of invalidity was granted along with sanctions against Technology Innovations.
To see a comprehensive list of our pending and completed representative patent litigation matters, please click here.
Section 337/ITC Litigation
- Products Having Laminated Packaging, Laminated Packaging, and Components Thereof (2013), USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-874 – Represented respondent Moët Hennessy USA, Inc. in a patent infringement investigation brought by Lamina Packaging Innovations, LLC regarding the use of laminated packaging for Dom Perignon and Moët Chandon products.
- Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing the Same (2013), USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-873 - Representing respondent LG Electronics in a patent infringement matter brought by Tela Innovations, Inc. The complaint names ten respondents and alleges infringement of seven patents involving advanced integrated circuit manufacturing processes.
- Certain Radio Frequency Integrated Circuits and Devices Containing Same (2012), USITC Inv. No. 377-TA-848 – Representing respondent Motorola Mobility Inc. in a patent infringement matter brought by Peregrine Semiconductor involving five US Patents related to technology used to significantly improve the vocal and linearity performance in radio frequency switch products, specifically mobile handset devices, such as the Droid Razr and Droid Bionic.
To see a comprehensive list of our Section 337/ITC Litigation matters, please click here.
Federal Circuit Litigation
- Industrial Technology Research v. ITC (Fed. Cir. 2013) – Counsel for intervenor LG Display on appeal from final determination of the ITC that ITRI's patents are not infringed. Pending.
- AstraZeneca v. Sandoz, et al. (Fed. Cir. 2013) – Lead counsel for appellee Sandoz in appeal of a trial court determination that AstraZeneca’s patents on Pulmecort Respules®, generic budesonide, are either invalid or not infringed. Pending.
- Biogen Idec Inc. et al. v. GlaxoSmithKline, et al. (Fed. Cir. 2012) – Counsel for appellants Biogen and Genentech on appeal from district court decision of noninfringement by GSK's antibody product Arzerra™, used in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
To see a comprehensive list of our Federal Circuit matters, please click here.
- Ranked among the top patent litigation firms in Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine's Patent 1000: The World's Leading Patent Practitioners, 2012-2015
Select News & Events
- IPPro Life Sciences Quotes Jay Nuttall on PAEs in Medical Technology Sector
- Steptoe Receives 26 Practice, 103 Individual Mentions in Legal 500 US 2015
- Law360 Covers Federal Circuit Win for Sandoz in Asthma Drug Patent Dispute
- Media Cover Steptoe’s Win for Sandoz in Patent Dispute Over Kid Asthma Drug
- “Fundamentals of Patent Litigation 2015,” PLI
- “Patent Disputes Forum,” Daily Journal
- “Fundamentals of Patent Litigation 2015,” PLI
- “Intellectual Property Strategy,” 2015 Clean Energy Challenge