Smartrend Manufacturing Group, Inc. v. Opti-Luxx Inc. (Jury Trial – W.D. Michigan): On November 29, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan found that Opti-Luxx, Inc., willfully infringed two of our U.S. Patents on LED bus signs. The conclusion of this 2-year-long case against Opti-Luxx came with the jury’s unanimous verdict confirming that both of our client’s patents had been infringed, that Opti-Luxx willfully infringed those patents and that lost profits damages were owed to the client for infringement of the patents.

CAO Lighting v. General Electric Company (Jury Trial – D. Delaware): A federal jury in Delaware found that General Electric will owe a combined $2 million to a Utah company, CAO Lighting, represented by Brooks Kushman, that owns the patent covering a type of LED light involved in this suit. Jurors deliberated for about a week and a majority voted in favor of CAO Lighting Inc.

Ameranth, Inc. v. Domino’s Pizza, Inc. (Summary Judgment – S.D. California): Successfully defended Domino’s Pizza in a patent infringement suit relating to menu generation and synchronization of data for mobile devices. Obtained summary judgment of unpatentability on a patent asserted against Domino’s and 30 other parties. Also served as counsel for Covered Business Method proceedings where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board held three other asserted patents unpatentable. Summary Judgment on all patents were affirmed on appeal. Court later awarded $2.7M in fees to Domino’s.
Case No. 3:11-cv-01810, 3:12-cv-00733

Innovation Ventures, LLC d/b/a Living Essentials, v. N.V.E., Inc. (Jury Trial – E.D. Michigan): Represented Plaintiff Living Essentials in trademark infringement action involving plaintiff’s 5-Hour ENERGY trademark. The jury found that Defendant N.V.E.’s sale of a competing product named “6 Hour Power” infringed Plaintiff’s trademark and awarded $10.6 million in damages. The jury also awarded an additional $11.5 million in disgorgement of N.V.E.’s profits and fully rejected N.V.E.’s $60 million false advertising claim. Case No: 4:08-cv-11867

Hilgraeve Corporation v. Symantec Corporation (Settlement – E.D. Michigan): Counsel for plaintiff in a patent infringement action involving anti-virus software. Secured a $62.5 million settlement for our client on the eve of trial. Case No. 97-cv-40370

RawCar Group, LLC v. Grace Medical et. al. (S.D. California): Successfully represented plaintiff in patent infringement action on two patents. Court found both patents valid and infringed on summary judgment. At trial, jury awarded damages and found defendants willful. Case No. 13-cv-01105

GeoTag, Inc. v. Domino’s Pizza Inc. (Summary Judgment – E.D. Texas): Successfully defended Domino’s Pizza in a patent infringement action in East Texas which also involved over 600 defendants. After the other defendants settled, Domino’s was sole defendant left in case. Court granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Domino’s on five different grounds. Case No. 10-cv-0572

Latentier, LLC v. International Paper Co. (Summary Judgment – E.D. Wisconsin & Federal Cicuit): Lead counsel for International Paper in successful defense of patent infringement action. Case No. 08-C-501

Great American Restaurant Company v. Domino’s Pizza (Jury Trial – E.D. Texas): Lead counsel for Domino`s in successful defense of various trademark claims relating to Domino`s sale of its Brooklyn-style pizza. Plaintiff withdrew claims during trial. Case No. 07-cv-00052

DietGoal, Inc. v. Domino’s Pizza, Inc. (E.D. Virginia): Successfully defended Domino’s in patent infringement action. Patent declared invalid as not directed to patentable subject matter. Case No. 2:12-cv-430

PJC Logistics, LLC v. General Motors and OnStar (Settlement – D. Minnessota): Counsel for GM and OnStar in MDL in Minnesota. Successfully defended patent infringement claim. Case No. 12-cv-00234

In re Certain Automotive Navigational Systems (ITC): Counsel for Ford Motor Co. in successful defense of patent infringement action at the ITC. Investigation No. 337-TA-814

Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. HoMedics, Inc. (Summary Judgment – W.D. Wisconsin): Represented HoMedics in patent infringement action in Wisconsin. Successfully moved for summary judgment of non-infringement. The decision was affirmed after Sunbeam appealed to the Federal Circuit. Case No. 08-cv-376

Armament Systems & Procedures v. Zen Design Group (Bench Trial – E.D. Wisconsin): Lead counsel in successful patent litigation defending flashlight manufacturer in the Eastern District of Wisconsin with over $30 million at stake; patent was declared unenforceable for inequitable conduct before the PTO and attorneys’ fees were rewarded. Case No. 00-C-1257

FTD, Inc. v. Fleurop Interflora (Settlement – E.D. Michigan): Successfully represented Swiss floral association, Fleurop Interflora, in trademark infringement action in the Eastern District of Michigan resulting in favorable settlement. Case No. 01-70954

Benedict v. General Motors (Summary Judgment – E.D. Michigan): Successfully defended General Motors patent litigation in the Northern District of Florida with over $25 million at stake; patent was declared invalid on summary judgment. Case No. 01-73026; 184 F. Supp.2d 11997

General Motors v. The Wildside (Summary Judgment – E.D. Michigan): Successfully represented General Motors in trademark litigation resulting in finding of infringement on summary judgment. The finding was affirmed by the Sixth Circuit. Case No. 00-cv-483