linda_mettes

Linda D. Mettes

Shareholder

Michigan OfficeP (248) 226-2933

DOWNLOAD V-CARD

Linda Mettes specializes in intellectual property litigation. Linda has tried patent, trademark, and copyright cases in Federal courts nationwide, including Delaware, California, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Utah, Florida, Ohio, Indiana, and the Federal Circuit and Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Linda has... see more >

Linda Mettes specializes in intellectual property litigation. Linda has tried patent, trademark, and copyright cases in Federal courts nationwide, including Delaware, California, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Utah, Florida, Ohio, Indiana, and the Federal Circuit and Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Linda has extensive experience in managing litigation from pre-suit investigation through trial/appeal, including discovery, expert report preparation, depositions, motions, Markman hearings, and mock jury research. Linda has briefed and/or argued well over 100 motions and appeals, including summary judgment, Daubert, Markman, discovery and sanctions motions. Linda was also selected to write a Petition for Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on patent written description law on behalf of a client.

Linda is a registered patent attorney authorized to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Linda`s technical ability cuts through various technology. She has handled cases in a wide array of technology such as mechanical devices, vaccines, birth control pills and other pharmaceuticals, computer disk drives, connectors, other hardware and software, ophthalmic surgical equipment, neurosurgical devices, stents, televisions, cell phones, mass spectrometry, medical imaging, metal casting, silicon wafers, automotive components, consumer products, financial products, Internet advertising, and polyethylene foam.

While adept at communicating mechanical, electrical, chemical and pharmaceutical technologies to a court, Linda also has a depth of experience on the damages side, for both plaintiffs and defendants. Linda has written articles and spoken at legal seminars on damages topics. Linda has also successfully precluded damage claims on behalf of defendants and defended the client`s ability to advance significant damage claims on behalf of plaintiffs.

Linda has also prosecuted patents, particularly in reexamination and continuation practice for patents asserted or about to be asserted in litigation. Linda has also provided legal opinions, conducted due diligence and negotiated and drafted licensing agreements.

Prior to joining Brooks Kushman, Linda was a partner at another Detroit-area law firm and Kenyon & Kenyon in New York City. She has also worked as a mechanical engineer for an automotive OEM in a rotational program involving product design, testing, manufacturing and advance R&D. < see less

Education

J.D., Northwestern University School of Law, cum laude

B.S., General Engineering, University of Illinois

Mercado v. Indio Products Corp., 2013 WL 2898224 (C.D. Cal. 2013):  Briefed and argued successful motion to dismiss copyright and trade dress infringement claims.

Island Intellectual Property LLC v. Deutsche Bank AG, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21742 (SDNY 2012) (settled after successful defense of damages expert).

Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 2010 TTAB LEXIS 212 (TTAB 2010), aff’d at 686 F.3d 1376 (August 3, 2012):  Determined an approach to obtain cancellation of mark and implemented it through a strategic deposition followed up by a successful motion for cancellation, later affirmed by CAFC.

1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. Lens.com, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43428, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99940, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56412 (D. Utah 2008/2009):  Obtained repeated sanctions for discovery obstruction.

MEMC Elec. Materials, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Materials Silicon Corp., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 22434 (Fed. Cir. 2007):  Authored appeal to obtain affirmance of Daubert exclusion of technical expert and non-infringement ruling.

Vulcan Engineering Co. v. FATA Aluminium, Inc., 278 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2002):  As counsel for investment company owning plaintiff, worked closely with co-counsel to obtain verdict against infringer; authored appeal brief to obtain affirmance by CAFC with additional price erosion damages awarded.

Dow Chem. Co. v. Astro-Valcour, Inc., 267 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2001): Implemented a strategy to place plaintiff in a catch-22 with a successful claim construction motion to ensure a loss either on infringement or validity that was followed up with successful summary judgment motion for invalidity; authored appeal brief to obtain affirmance by CAFC.

Aptargroup, Inc. v. Summit Packaging Systems, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 28047 (Fed. Cir. 1998): Obtained a denial of lost profits at trial and sanctions prior to trial with affirmance by CAFC.

Evans Med. v. American Cyanamid Co., 11 F. Supp. 2d 338 (SDNY 1998), aff’d, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 18436 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 1999): Authored brief resulting in summary judgment of non-infringement for defendant, affirmed by CAFC.

Aesculap AG & Co. KG v. Walter Lorenz Surgical, Inc. (N.D. Cal.):  Prosecuted continuation applications, conducted discovery and authored successful claim construction ruling wholly in favor of plaintiff.

Johnson & Johnson v. American Home Products Corp. (E.D. Penn.):  After vigorous discovery and thorough mock research, wrote successful in limine and Daubert motions excluding an expert’s billion dollar damages opinion in pre-trial phase, leading in significant part to favorable settlement.

Henkel Corp v. Sika Corp (E.D. Mich.): Developed non-infringement theory and evidence leading to successful settlement.

Advanced Medical Optics Inc. v. Alcon Manufacturing (D. Del.):  Taking over matter after an adverse jury verdict, developed and advanced new evidence of invalidity leading to favorable settlement.

Alcon Manufacturing Ltd v. Advanced Medical Optics Inc. (N.D. Tex.)(settled).

Parental Guide of Texas, Inc. v. Funai Corp., Sony Corp., et al. (E.D. Tex.) (settled just prior to trial).

DuPont Pharmaceutical Co. v. Nycomed Amersham Imaging (D. Del.) (settled after claim construction hearing).

Cephalon Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. (DNJ)(settled).

American Bar Association

American Intellectual Property Law Association

Intellectual Property Owner’s Association, Women in IP Law Committee

Leadership Council on Legal Diversity

National Asian Pacific American Bar Association – Intellectual Property Committee; Women’s Leadership Network

State Bar of Michigan

State Bar of New York

United States Patent and Trademark Office Registered Attorney

Women’s Bar Association of Oakland County