Covington’s patent litigation practice starts with top-notch trial lawyers who know how to prepare a case for trial and who have tried patent infringement and other important commercial cases to verdicts before judges and juries, and who have handled arbitrations before arbitral panels throughout the world. Two of our patent litigation partners are Fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers, and one was elected a Vice Chair of the Complex Litigation Committee.
By developing case themes early, focusing our discovery efforts on the key issues, and demonstrating the ability and drive to take the case to the courtroom, we put our clients in the best position to win -- whether at trial, on summary judgment, or through a negotiated resolution.
With over 100 attorneys in our practice, more than 50 of whom clerked for federal trial and appellate judges and more than 60 of whom have technical degrees, Covington offers clients the requisite combination of attorneys trained in both technology and the law for each engagement. The results are trial teams that provide clients with powerful and sophisticated advocacy.
Representative Matters
- Representation of six manufacturers of key components of and finished flash memory devices in an International Trade Commission Section 337 Investigation involving a patent claiming a flash memory system, such as a USB drive, storing both encrypted user data and necessary decryption algorithms on the drive. Four of our clients settled on favorable terms, leaving two clients at trial. Following the evidentiary hearing, the ALJ determined that there was no violation of Section 337, because neither of the two asserted patents was infringed and one of the asserted patents was invalid. Our victory was affirmed by the commission. Flash Memory Controllers, Drives, Memory Cards and Media Players (USITC).
- Representation of Ariba in a patent infringement action regarding on-line auction technology. We won summary judgment on one patent prior to trial. After the trial, the jury returned a verdict that the second patent was infringed, both patents were valid, one patent was willfully infringed, and awarded Ariba damages. We court then awarded enhanced damages and injunctive relief. The judgment was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. Ariba v. Emptoris (E.D. Tex.).
- Representation of Atmel in a patent infringement action where plaintiff Agere claimed that Atmel infringed four semiconductor patents, including what it touted as its key tungsten patents. Agere sought damages of approximately $200 million as well as enhancement for claimed willful infringement. After a three-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in Atmel’s favor; invalidating the tungsten patents, finding the fourth not infringed as well as invalid, and awarding Agere zero in damages. Agere Systems, Inc. v. Atmel Corp. (E.D. Penn.).
- Representation of Caliper in two related patent infringement actions concerning microfluidic devices. Both cases settled after a $52M verdict was obtained for our client Caliper in the companion trade secrets case, also handled by Covington. Caliper v. ACLARA Biosciences/ACLARA Biosciences v. Caliper Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal.).
|
|