Past Representative Matters
JDSU v. Metconnex
Lead counsel for plaintiff JDSU in a patent infringement case pending in Federal court in Los Angeles. The case involved tiny movable mirrors created with MEMS technology for routing laser beams. The case settled with Metconnex agreeing to stop producing the infringing device, which put that company out of business.
Modern Creative Solutions v. Dell
Lead counsel for plaintiff MCS in a trade secret misappropriation, fraud and breach of contract case pending in Federal court in New Jersey. The case involves product advisor software used to increase sales over the Internet. The case settled on favorable terms.
Euro RSCG v. Tarzian
Lead counsel for plaintiff Euro RSCG in a copyright infringement case pending in Federal court in Connecticut. This case involves the creation of derivative works in copyrighted software used in marketing applications. The case settled on favorable terms.
Daiichi Pharmaceutical v. Mylan
Counsel for plaintiff Daiichi in patent infringement case in Federal court in West Virginia concerning the fluoroquinolone antibiotic Levaquin. Chief Judge Irene M. Keeley ruled in favor of Daiichi on all claims in their patent infringement action stemming from Mylan's filing of an ANDA. The 116-page decision followed a two-month bench trial last year and rejected each of Mylan's five separate invalidity and unenforceability defenses. Prepared the inventors and key technical fact and experts witnesses for their trial testimony, including the lead inventor, Dr. Hayakawa, who had been accused of inequitable conduct. The Federal Circuit affirmed Judge Keeley’s decision.
3Com v. Realtek
Counsel for plaintiff 3Com in patent infringement case in Federal court in San Francisco concerning Ethernet chip technology. Prior counsel were sanctioned for failing to provide the detail required for preliminary infringement contentions under the Patent Local Rules. Mr. Pitcock put together preliminary infringement contentions using publicly available materials that not only withstood scrutiny, but together with key testimony and claims constructions by Mr. Pitcock helped obtain a 45 million dollar verdict for 3Com. The case settled for $70 million.
CPI (Avistar) v. Polycom
Counsel for plaintiff CPI in a patent infringement case in Federal court in San Francisco concerning videoconferencing technology. The case was settled successfully shortly after motions for summary judgment were filed on the four patents at issue. The motions for summary judgment were made possible after a successful Markman hearing argued by Mr. Pitcock, when District Judge Chesney ruled in CPI’s favor on the construction of ten claim terms at issue in the four CPI patents at issue in the case.
Pumatech v. Synchrologic
Counsel for defendant Synchrologic in patent infringement case in Federal court in Oakland concerning software used to synchronize databases. Case settled on favorable terms after the preliminary infringement contentions for the six patents at issue were largely thrown out of Court under a strategy developed by Mr. Pitcock.
Patriot Scientific v. Intel
Counsel for defendant Intel against patent infringement claims pending in Federal court in California. Mr. Pitcock developed the invalidity and noninfringement arguments, and the case was settled thereafter on favorable terms.
USA-Kaifa Technology v. New Focus
Counsel for plaintiff USA-Kaifa in patent and trade secret infringement action in Federal court in San Francisco concerning optical circulators. Case settled on favorable terms after successful Markman hearing on construction of terms developed by Mr. Pitcock.
VISX v. Nidek
Counsel for defendant Nidek in patent infringement action (and antitrust counterclaim) in Federal court in San Francisco and U.S. International Trade Commission concerning excimer laser refractive correction surgery. Nidek prevailed before the ITC on multiple grounds related to VISX’s initial infringement claims. Case in San Francisco settled on favorable terms with respect to both patent and antitrust claims.
