Subscribe

  • How Can We Help You?

    Global Problem Solving from Covington: Deal with Complex Problems Anywhere in the World

Young_Stanley_1000x714_ENV

Stanley Young

Senior Counsel

Palo Alto +1 650 632 4704

  • About
  • Representative Matters
  • Credentials
  • About

    Stan Young uses his strong advocacy and advising skills to help his clients achieve the best results in patent, trade secret, and other high stakes cases.

    For decades he has represented companies in the telecommunications, electronics, semiconductor, software and financial services industries in all phases of federal district and state court litigation around the United States, in the Federal and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals, in international arbitrations and in the U.S. International Trade Commission.

    Stan was Managing Partner of the firm’s Palo Alto office from 2008 to 2014, and has served on its Business, Evaluation, and Diversity committees.

    Stan has represented companies such as SK Innovation, Samsung, and Atmel in district court and International Trade Commission disputes over electric vehicle battery, cellular, semiconductor process and circuit patents. Many of his cases have involved patents alleged to be essential under wireless communications and other standards and the obligations that arise from the standardization process, including for licensing under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Stan also led a successful defense of a Chinese steel company in another ITC dispute over alleged steel manufacturing trade secrets.

    In 2008, Stan won a much-cited Federal Circuit case, O2 Micro v. Beyond Innovation, involving inverter controller patents, establishing that a judge must resolve a case-deciding claim construction dispute rather than leaving it to a jury. In a notable pro bono case, he led a litigation that halted racial profiling against Hispanics by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, for which California Lawyer recognized him as a California Lawyer of the Year in 2014.

    Stan is listed in Best Lawyers in America for intellectual property and patent litigation and as a Northern California Super Lawyer.

    Areas of Expertise

  • Practices and Industries
  • Representative Matters
    • Represented SK Innovation in a patent infringement case against electric vehicle battery products of LG Chem (In the Matter of Certain Pouch-Type Battery Cells, Battery Modules, and Battery Packs, and Products Containing the Same, ITC Investigation 337-TA-1179).
    • Represented a global technology company in trade secret lawsuits against Motorola Solutions involving wireless base station technology and obtained a preliminary injunction preventing the transfer of confidential information in the context of a corporate acquisition.
    • Represented appellant in overturning on appeal a verdict of infringement of three patents asserted against inverter controllers used in the backlighting of LCD screens. The Federal Circuit’s decision describes the duty of a district court judge to construe a simple English phrase in a patent claim (“only if”) where that construction will decide the outcome of the case (O2 Micro v. Beyond Innovation (BiTEK), 521 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2008)).
    • Represented Juniper in patent case directed at IEEE 802.11 b and g networking equipment (Castlemorton v. Juniper Networks (W.D. Texas)).
    • Defended Samsung Electronics in an International Trade Commission litigation brought by OSRAM over patents on light conversion techniques and LED package structures (In re Certain Light-Emitting Diodes And Products Containing Same, ITC Investigation 337-TA-785).
    • Represented plaintiff in a patent infringement case involving semiconductor technology. Jury trial involving a charge pump patent resulted in judgment of more than $36 million in plaintiff's favor, which was affirmed on appeal (Atmel Corporation v. Silicon Storage Technology (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented defendants in a lawsuit over a patent alleged to cover the Verified by Visa service for authenticating the identity of a payment cardholder in an on-line transaction. Defendants won summary judgment of non-infringement. Obtained affirmance on appeal (Safeclick LLC v. Visa International Service Association and Visa U.S.A., Inc. (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Defended a global technology company in litigation brought by InterDigital over patents on wireless communications technologies and FRAND obligations, and in an arbitration over royalty rates.
    • Defended a global technology company in lawsuits against its cellphone products brought in the Eastern District of Texas by:
      • Maxell, over patents on video, power saving, network selection, and handover;
      • Fundamental Innovations, over patents on charging over USB; and
      • PanOptis, over patents asserted against LTE cellular functionalities and video compression, and also involving the relationship between U.S. and Chinese judicial proceedings over FRAND obligations.

    • Represented Samsung in an International Trade Commission investigation involving patents on interrupt control circuitry and interprocessor communications asserted against cell phones and televisions (In re Certain Electronic Devices, Including Handheld Wireless Communications Devices, Investigations Nos. 337-TA-667 and 337-TA-673).
    • Represented Baosteel against trade secret misappropriation claim brought by U.S. Steel in the International Trade Commission; U.S. Steel dismissed the claim after fact discovery (In re Carbon and Alloy Steel Products, Investigation No. 337-TA-1002).
    • Represented several respondents in an International Trade Commission action relating to patents asserted against flash memory controllers and devices, brought by SanDisk Corporation (In re Certain Flash Memory Controllers, Drives, Memory Cards, and Media Players and Products Containing Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-619).
    • Represented DVD authoring software manufacturer Sonic Solutions in defending lawsuit involving patents on recording video onto disc, as well as trade secret and other claims (MedioStream, Inc. v. Sonic Solutions (E.D. Tex.)).
    • Defended seven companies against patent that was asserted against CD-Roms containing software with links to websites (Disc Link Corporation v. Oracle Corporation, et al. (E.D. Tex.)).
    • Represented wireless communications technology company in patent litigation over patents on video compression and wireless communications technologies (QUALCOMM Corporation v. Broadcom Corporation (S.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented complainant in an International Trade Commission action relating to patents on EEPROM and Flash memory circuits and memory cell designs. After trial, complainant obtained an exclusion order, affirmed on appeal, prohibiting the importation into the United States of infringing chips and circuit boards containing the same (In the Matter of Certain EPROM, EEPROM, Flash Memory, etc., Investigation No. 337-TA-395).
    • Represented a global technology company in a copyright, patent, and trade secret case relating to router software.
    • Represented plaintiff Visa in a declaratory relief action for non-infringement of trademark, and in a trade secret misappropriation action, involving service for authenticating identity of a payment card holder in an online transaction (Visa U.S.A. Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc. (N.D. Cal. and Santa Clara County Superior Court)).
    • Represented Visa in a patent and trade secret case involving payment card holder identity authentication technology (Starpay.com v. Visa International Service Association and Visa U.S.A., Inc. (N.D. Texas)).
    • Represented defendant in a patent case involving online shopping (Harrington v. SHOP.COM (D. Colo.)).
    • Represented plaintiff in a copyright, trade secret, and contract action involving mainframe software. Obtained a preliminary injunction against use and dissemination of the client’s software (Computer Associates International, Inc. v. TJB Ventures, Inc. (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented a maker of power plant control software in defending against a claim of infringement of 26 neural network and other process control patents (Pavilion Technologies, Inc. v. Pegasus Technologies, Inc. (S.D. Tex.)).
    • Represented Four Seasons in a patent infringement action involving automatic call tracking and billing technology for the hotel industry. Summary judgment for client affirmed on appeal.  (Phonometrics, Inc. v. Four Seasons Hotels (S.D. Fla.)).
    • Represented defendant in a copyright and trade secret dispute over an uninstaller program for personal computers (CyberMedia, Inc. v. Symantec Corporation (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Defended two software companies against a claim that the packaging of software sold in retail stores violated the California unfair competition statute. Judgment for defendants in consolidated cases affirmed on appeal (Intervention Inc. v. Symantec Corporation; Intervention Inc. v. Vertisoft Systems (San Francisco Superior Court and Cal. Ct. App., First District)).
    • Represented defendant and counterclaim plaintiff on breach of contract claims over personal computer anti-virus software and counterclaims for source code misappropriation. Summary adjudication was granted for defendant on most claims, followed by settlement (Carmel Software Engineering v. Central Point Software (D. Ore.)).
    • Represented plaintiff in a copyright and trade secret action between two manufacturers of software for authoring DVDs (Sonic Solutions v. Spruce Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented defendant in a copyright action involving mathematics education worksheets (Kumon U.S.A. v. Daekyo America, Inc. and Daekyo Co., Ltd. (C.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented Atmel, a chip designer and manufacturer specializing in non-volatile memories, particularly EPROMS, EEPROMs, and flash memories, and programmable logic devices (PLDs) in cases involving a PLD circuit patent and an EEPROM cell patent (Advanced Micro Devices v. Atmel Corporation and Seeq Technology v. Atmel (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented Atmel in litigation concerning disputes arising out of a development agreement with General Instrument. The issues related to EPROM and EEPROM processes and circuit design (General Instrument Corporation v. Atmel Corporation (S.D. N.Y.) and Atmel Corporation v. General Instrument Corporation (S.D. N.Y.)).
    • Represented Texas Instruments and Chips and Technologies in patent infringement action brought by Intel. The patents related to the memory management system in the Intel 386 microprocessor and a breakpoint apparatus for system debugging (Intel Corp. v. Chips and Technologies, Inc., Texas Instruments (N.D. Cal.)).
    • Represented class of Latinos in Maricopa County, Arizona in racial profiling civil rights case. Obtained injunctive relief, including appointment of a federal monitor to oversee reform, and obtained affirmance on appeal (Melendres v. Arpaio 989 F.Supp.2d 822 (D. Ariz. 2013) and 784 F.3d 1254 (9th Cir. 2015)).

    Areas of Expertise

  • Credentials
    Education
    • Harvard Law School, J.D., 1985
        • magna cum laude
    • Stanford University, A.B./A.M., 1982
        • Phi Beta Kappa
    Bar Admissions
    • California
    Judicial Clerkship
    • Hon. Charles Merrill, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
    Accolades

    Areas of Expertise

News and Insights

Events