Louis A. Klapp, Associate

Representative Public Matters

  • Represented a manufacturer of smartphones and smart TVs against patent infringement claims brought by a well-known patent assertion entity. The case is pending in federal district court.
  • Represented a natural and organic grocery store seeking to prevent registration of trademarks in the fast-food industry that are similar to its own. The case is pending in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
  • Represented a software company asserting trademark infringement claims against its competitor. The case is pending in federal district court.
  • Represented a supplier of telephone hardware seeking to cancel the claims in its competitor’s patent. The case is pending in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
  • Represented a publisher against accusations of trademark infringement and unfair competition. The case is pending in federal district court.
  • Represented a natural and organic grocery store seeking to cancel registration of trademarks in the vending machine industry that are similar to its own. The case is pending in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
  • Represented a fenestration software company against accusations of patent infringement by its competitor. Obtained settlement of the matter without payment of any compensation based on prior art found prior to the filing of declaratory judgment action.
  • Represented a healthcare software company against a well-known patent assertion entity. Won a motion to dismiss invalidating key claims as unpatentable subject matter. Obtained a zero-dollar settlement ending the remainder of the case.
  • Represented a German motor manufacturer that accused a competitor of patent infringement. The case settled prior to the close of discovery.
  • Represented a leading electronics company in a litigation filed by a competitor in federal district court. The competitor alleged that the client infringed several patents related to smoke alarm technology, and it sought a preliminary injunction. The court denied the motion for preliminary injunction, indicating that “[a]t this stage of the proceedings, the likelihood of [plaintiff] being able to prove its case seems faint.”
  • Represented a leading consumer electronics company in petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for inter partes review of several patents related to software. The dispute settled shortly before the petitions were filed.
  • Represented a Korean manufacturer and its customers in litigations filed by a large automotive parts supplier in the U.S. International Trade Commission and federal district court. The plaintiff alleged that the client and its customers infringed several patents related to windshield wiper blades. The case settled shortly before trial.
  • Represented leading telecommunication equipment suppliers in a complex multi-district action brought by a patent assertion entity. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants infringed dozens of patents related to wireless networking. The case settled after a highly favorable court order limited the plaintiff’s potential damages claim.
  • Represented a leading supplier of krill products in an investigation initiated by a competitor in the U.S. International Trade Commission. The plaintiff alleged that the client infringed several patents relating to krill oil omega-3 supplements. The case settled shortly before trial.
  • Represented a leading property and casualty insurance company and its affiliates in federal district court. The clients were accused of infringing patents related to online insurance quoting. The case settled before trial.
  • Represented a Japanese manufacturer against a competitor in federal district court. The client was accused of infringing several patents related to valves for controlling fluid flow. The case settled before trial.
  • Represented a leading developer of medical technologies in a litigation filed by a competitor in federal district court. The plaintiff alleged that the client infringed a patent related to a catheter system, and it sought a preliminary injunction. The case settled shortly before the preliminary injunction hearing.