Patent Litigation and Technology Dispute ResolutionPrint PDF
Briggs and Morgan’s Patent Litigation and Technology Dispute Resolution Team has provided services to many of the nation’s leading technology companies. Collectively, our team’s experience spans hundreds of disputes involving technology and intellectual property in courtrooms around the country.
We pride ourselves on our communication and collaboration with our clients, and on understanding their business and the changing dynamics and objectives of each legal engagement. Our standard practice includes early case assessment and working with our clients to develop a case plan and budget. We provide timely and periodic progress updates on substantial case developments as well as reports on actual spend against budget. Our specific experience encompasses the following areas:
- Patent infringement litigation
- Patent licensing disputes
- International arbitration
- Unfair competition litigation
- Post grant review proceedings under the AIA
- ITC Proceedings
- Trade secret litigation
- Markman proceedings
Briggs’ Patent Litigation and Technology Dispute Resolution Team provides experience comparable to large coastal firms at Midwest prices and Midwest client responsiveness. Briggs’ lawyers in this practice area have been recognized by their peers as “Top 40 Intellectual Property” lawyers, Intellectual Property “Super Lawyers,” and Minnesota Attorneys of the Year, and serve as thought leaders in the nation’s premier intellectual property groups.
Sampling of recent representative experience:
- Non-infringement finding and complete defense verdict in Eastern District of Virginia in a case involving stent grafts in 2012, followed by a summary affirmance at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in 2013, on a case with an $85 million claim by plaintiff.
- Jury Verdict of $57 million in a case involving PFO closure devices in Northern District of California in 2009.
- Dismissal of patent infringement claims brought by Fortune 500 pharmaceutical company against client on formula involving prostaglandins.
- Obtained a favorable result for respondent in a Connecticut arbitration where claimant sought damages of nearly $20,000,000, based on a respondent’s alleged failure to properly design and manufacture state-of-the-art hydronic circulator pumps.
- Successfully represented client in a major patent infringement action involving graphical software programming and systems, which involved over 500 patent claims, and navigating highly complex litigation and Patent Office reexamination issues.
- Represented company in IP acquisition and analysis matters involving implantable neural medical devices for use in treating epilepsy and neural prosthetics.
- Multiple successful appeals to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
- Represent accused infringer in a patent infringement action relating to vascular stent technology. Obtained complete stay of district court proceeding pending resolution of IPR, including all appeals.
- Represented cosmeceutical client who was sued by a Fortune 500 pharmaceutical company for patent infringement on a chemical patent related to prostaglandins. Obtained favorable Markman ruling during claim construction, followed by summary judgment of non-infringement, which removed client from patent infringement claims.
- Represented Fortune 100 manufacturing company in patent infringement dispute against competitor relating to synthetic orthopedic casting tapes. Obtained $129 million verdict in favor of client, which verdict was upheld on appeal.
- Represented Fortune 200 medical device manufacturer in patent infringement litigation related to patent on stent grafts. Non-infringement ruling and $0 award where plaintiff sought $85 million in damages.
- Represented Fortune 200 medical device manufacturer in patent litigation on patents related to shape memory alloys asserted against a company making stent grafts. On eve of trial, negotiated settlement agreement with favorable license terms for client.
- Represented Fortune 200 medical device manufacturer in patent litigation on patents related to shape memory alloys asserted against company making PFO occluder devices. Obtained $57 million jury verdict in favor of client.
- Represented Fortune 200 medical device manufacturer patent holder in week-long bench trial in the Northern District of California on defendants' defense of obviousness type double patenting. Negotiated favorable confidential settlement on behalf of client before the opinion was issued.
- November 20, 2014
- September 12, 2014
- June 2, 2014
- October 31, 2013
- September 25, 2013
- July 24, 2013
- September 21, 2011
- May 19, 2016
- February 10, 2015
- University of Minnesota Law School - Room 25, May 21, 2014
- May 3, 2016
- January 23, 2015
- August 15, 2014
- March 29, 2013
- March 7, 2013
- February 22, 2013
- February 21, 2013
- December 21, 2012
- September 7, 2012
- September 27, 2011
- September 19, 2011
- June 2, 2011
- January 13, 2011
- July 7, 2010
- March 24, 2010
- June 16, 2009
- March 30, 2009
- March 30, 2009
- March 30, 2009
- November 24, 2008
- November 20, 2008
- November 19, 2008
- August 11, 2008
- July 1, 2007
Womens IP Forum: Top Topics in IP 2015
Scott M. Flaherty
“The 3D Revolution” — 3D Printing and Intellectual Property