Patent Litigation

Patent litigation is inherently unpredictable and can be an expensive proposition. Yet, in a time of increasing financial pressures, it is vital to a company’s success to protect its intellectual property. Steptoe’s patent litigation team combines its wealth of experience with lean staffing and a teamwork approach to provide our clients with top-notch, effective, and efficient representation.

Over the past five years, Steptoe has developed a thriving, national patent litigation practice that operates seamlessly with the traditional litigation strengths of the firm. Our patent litigation team consists of several former in-house counsels, who understand clients’ top priorities, including budgeting, responsiveness, and efficiency. Client teams are staffed leanly; clients are able to speak directly with lead lawyers, who are intimately involved with the matters and are available at any time. We have attracted several lawyers and specialists with PhDs and masters degrees in all areas of technology and who represent clients in all disciplines of patent law.

Our attorneys have tried scores of cases to judgment for Fortune 500 companies, midsize companies, and small, emerging high-tech companies. We have litigated cases for prominent companies in a range of industries, including automobile, consumer products, electronics, financial, telecommunications, transportation, and the internet. Our clients, many of whom are not long-standing clients of the firm, have consistently returned to Steptoe and expanded their relationships with us year after year since the creation of the practice in 2003. We believe these companies come back to Steptoe because of our responsiveness, quality, and focus on efficient litigation.

Our partners have extensive litigation experience in courts throughout the United States and before the US International Trade Commission. They have been lead counsel in several patent infringement litigations in federal district courts across the country. Several of our IP litigators provide trial and appellate representation of corporations in major patent litigation cases. Another member of the team successfully litigated important patent interferences before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and trademark opposition/cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, in the USPTO.

Finally, as an added value to our clients, the firm established a Complex Litigation Discovery Center (CLDC) in 2003 in Rockville, Maryland. More than 100 contract attorneys at the CLDC with much reduced rates assist in all aspects of discovery and litigation, performing legal analysis of documents and electronic files accurately and cost-efficiently. This turnkey operation is dedicated to that function and applies tried and true quality assurance protocols.

Representative Matters

Current Federal Patent Litigation Cases

Semiconductor Energy Laboratory, Co., LTD v. ChiMei Innolux Corp., Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., Acer America Corp., View Sonic Corp., Vizio Inc., and Westinghouse Digital, LLC. (C.D.C.A., 2012) - Representing SEL in a patent litigation against six defendants accused of infringing six of SEL's patents relating to LCDs.
AstraZeneca v. Sandoz Inc., (D.N.J., 2011) - Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic subsidiary of Novartis, in an ANDA patent litigation against AstraZeneca regarding two patents for Pulmicort Respules®, an inhalation product used to treat asthma.
Beacon Navigation GmbH v. Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. et al (D. Del., 2011) – Representing Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan North America Inc. in patent litigation brought by Beacon Navigation GmbH regarding six patents related to Global Positioning System (“GPS”) technology.
Beacon Navigation GmbH v. Hyundai Motor Company et al (D. Del., 2011) – Representing Hyundai Motor Company, Hyundai Motor America, and Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama LLC in patent litigation brought by Beacon Navigation GmbH regarding six patents related to Global Positioning System (“GPS”) technology.
Beacon Navigation GmbH v. Kia Motors Corp. et al (D. Del., 2011) – Representing Kia Motors Corp., Kia Motors America Inc., and Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia Inc. in patent litigation brought by Beacon Navigation GmbH regarding six patents related to Global Positioning System (“GPS”) technology.
Stragent, LLC et. al. v. Pioneer Electronics (USA) Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing American Honda Motor Co., Inc. in a patent infringement suit brought by Stragent and SeeSaw Foundation regarding a patent for voice recognition technology.
Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation against Allergan regarding two patents for Lumigan®, a topical medication used to treat glaucoma.
Technology Innovations LLC v. Amazon.Com Inc. (D. Del., 2011) – Representing 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.
Allergan v. Sandoz Inc. (M.D. NC, 2011) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to bimatoprost sold by Allergan as Latisse®.
DataTreasury Corp. v. Capital One Financial Corp., et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing Regions Financial Corporation and Regions Bank in patent infringement litigation involving image capture and encryption technology.
Unified Messaging Solutions, LLC v. Facebook, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing Regions Financial Corporation and Regions Bank in patent infringement litigation involving online messaging services and application programs.
Abridge Technology v. MetroPCS Communications, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing Regions Financial Corporation in patent infringement litigation involving the use of electronic tokens and related software programs.
Phoenix Licensing Inc. et al. v. Alliance Data Systems Corp. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) – Representing Regions Financial Corporation and Regions Bank in a patent infringement suit involving the automatic marketing of financial products based on specific customer information.
TQP Development, LLC v. Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America et al. (E.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing GEICO Corporation and Government Employees Insurance Company in a patent infringement suit relating to the transmission of encrypted data over a communications link.
Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. USAmeribank et al. (C.D. Fla., 2011) - Representing EverBank in patent infringement litigation relating to account security for financial services and wireless telephone accounts.
Technology Innovations, LLC v. Amazon.com, et al. (S.D. Tex., 2011) - Representing Amazon.com, Inc., a provider of e-commerce, in a patent litigation matter related to cloud computing filed in Texas brought by Technology Innovations, LLC. Plaintiffs alleged patent infringement by Amazon.com, Inc. and requested that the Court award them damages, enhanced damages, injunctive relief, costs, and fees.
Spedire Technology LLC v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., et al. (W.D. Pa., 2011) - Representing FedEx Corporation, a provider of air and ground delivery services as well as business services, including high-speed internet access, videoconferencing, and presentation support among other services, in a patent litigation matter filed in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania brought by Spedire Technology LLC. Plaintiffs alleged patent infringement by FedEx Corporation and requested that the Court award them damages, enhanced damages, injunctive relief, costs, and fees. Steptoe has filed an Answer and Counterclaim against Spedire Technology LLC.
Aristocrat Techs. Australia v. International Gaming Techs. (Fed. Cir., 2010) – Representing Aristocrat Techs. Australia in an appeal of summary judgment determination of noninfringement based on the doctrine of joint infringement. The case is currently pending a decision.
Stragent, LLC et al v. Amazon.Com, Inc., et al (E.D., Tex., 2010) - Representing Amazon.com in patent litigation brought by Stragent and The Seesaw Foundation in the Eastern District of Texas dealing with a method of providing data dictionary-driven web-based database applications.
OPTi Inc. v. Silicon Integrated Systems Corp. et al (E.D. Tex., 2010) - Representing OPTi Inc. in a patent infringement case against SIS and Via, two computer chipset manufacturers. The patents involved are OPTi's presnoop patents.
MonoSol Rx, LLC v. Biodelivery Sciences International, Inc. et al (D. NJ, 2010) – Representing MonoSol Rx, LLC, a leading drug delivery company, against several drug manufacturers in a patent infringement and false patent marking matter related to MonoSol’s patent on its dissolving medicated film drug delivery system.
Merck v. Sandoz Inc. (D. Del., 2010) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to caspofungin sold by Merck as Cancidas®.
Allergan v. Sandoz Inc. (D. Del., 2010) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to bimatoprost sold by Allergan as Lumigan®.
Tadayon et al v. Coach USA, Inc. et al (D. DC, 2010) – Representing Coach USA, Inc. in a patent infringement case related to wireless communication devices.
Parallel Networks, LLC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2010) – Representing Disney Online, Time, Inc., and Toyota against allegations of patent infringement involving dynamically generated applets in Internet software applications.
Keranos, LLC v. Analog Devices, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2010) - Representing Samsung Electronics, Inc. in a patent infringement case related to the use and manufacture of integrated circuits using embedded flash memory.
Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. Pick Five Imports, Inc. (C.D. Cal., 2010) – Representing Sunbeam Products, Inc. in a design patent infringement case related to a three section buffet server sold as the Triple Slow Cooker Buffet.
TQP Development, LLC v. Bank of New York Mellon Corporation et al. (E.D. Tex., 2010) - Representing Time Warner, Inc. against allegations of patent infringement involving encrypted data transmission technology.
Site Update Solutions LLC v. Accor North America Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2010) – Representing The Walt Disney Company against allegations of patent infringement involving the update of Internet search engines.
W.E.T. Automotive Systems Ltd. v. Amerigon Inc. (E.D. Mich., 2010) – Representing W.E.T. Automotive Systems Ltd. in patent litigation against Amerigon Inc. There are thirteen patents at issue in two different cases, with assertions of patents by both parties. The technology relates to the heating and cooling of automobile seats. Amerigon previously brought suit against W.E.T. but that suit was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
SimpleAir, Inc. v. AWS Convergence Technology, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex., 2009) – Representing Disney Online, ESPN Enterprises, Inc., and American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. in patent infringement litigation relating to the delivery of content, notifications, and updates to mobile computing devices.
Genzyme Corp. v. Sandoz Inc. (D. Md., 2009) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to doxercalciferol sold by Genzyme as Hectorol®.
Pfizer v. Sandoz Inc. (D. NJ, 2009) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to pregabalin sold by Pfizer as Lyrica®.
Elan Pharma International Ltd. et al. v. Biovail Laboratories International SRL et al. (D. NJ, 2008) – Representing Fournier Laboratoires Ireland Ltd., an innovative pharmaceutical company, in a patent infringement action under the Hatch-Waxman Act based on Biovail’s filing of an Abbreviated New Drug Application to market a generic version of TriCor® 48 mg and 145 mg products.
Abbott Laboratories et al. v. Biovail Laboratories International SRL et al. (N.D. Ill., 2008) – Representing Laboratoires Fournier S.A., an innovative pharmaceutical company, in a patent infringement action under the Hatch-Waxman Act based on Biovail’s filing of an Abbreviated New Drug Application to market a generic version of TriCor® 48 mg and 145 mg products.
Sonovion v. Sandoz Inc. (E.D. NC, 2008) – Representing Sandoz Inc., the generic drug subsidiary of Novartis, in patent litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to Levocetirizine sold by UCB as Xyzal®.
LML Patent Corp. v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. et al. (E.D. Tex., 2008) – Representing Regions Bank in a case involving certain payment services.
MHL Tek v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (E.D. Tex., 2007) – Representing American Honda Motor Co., Inc. in patent litigation involving tire pressure sensor monitors.

To see a comprehensive list of our representative patent litigation matters, please click here.

Noteworthy

Charles Schill was ranked among the top 250 patent litigators in Intellectual Asset Management’s "Patent Litigation 250" for 2011

Select News & Events

Publications

Rogue Websites and the ITC: New Proposed Anti-Piracy Legislation
December 16, 2011
Intellectual Property Advisory: Effective Timeline for the America Invents Act
November 4, 2011
Patent Law Creates a First-to-Disclose System
September 27, 2011, Daily Journal
Patent Bill: Only Time Will Tell If Congress Got It Right
September 9, 2011, Daily Journal

More Publications »