Intellectual Property Litigation
Skilled legal support from an IP litigation powerhouse
Capabilities at a glance
- Full-spectrum intellectual property (IP) litigation capability across patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, false advertising, domain name and IP licensing disputes.
- Nationwide courtroom presence in the federal courts and other forums where IP cases are tried, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas, the District of Delaware, the Northern District of California, the Eastern and Western Districts of Wisconsin, the Northern District of Illinois, the International Trade Commission (ITC), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
- Deep technical bench covering virtually all technical areas, including biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, software, semiconductors, memory systems, virtualization technologies, and cellular and mobile communications, backed by attorneys with technical degrees and a track record of success.
- A commitment to winning that sees our clients return to us time and again. Several of our IP litigators are listed in Best Lawyers in America.
- Named a “Most Feared Law Firm” in litigation by BTI Consulting Group in its “Litigation Outlook” publication.
Your business partners in IP litigation
Everything we do, inside and outside the courtroom, is based on a deep understanding of our client’s needs and expectations. From the outset, we will endeavor to become experts in your products and wider business objectives, before developing a litigation strategy that is most likely to secure your IP and achieve your goals. We know from our extensive experience how complex IP cases can be, and we know how to tell your story in a way that judges and juries understand; everything we do is about maximizing your chances of success. Our sophisticated budgeting and case management offers you assurances on cost predictability, so you can be confident fees will not run out of control.
In addition to our premier IP Litigation team, we offer clients a uniquely integrated approach with other professionals at Quarles that set us apart. We work seamlessly with our patent prosecution professionals who actively support high-stakes patent disputes and manage complex quasi-litigation and administrative proceedings, including UDRP complaints, foreign oppositions, inter partes challenges and sophisticated online brand protection strategies. This seamless collaboration ensures that your IP portfolio is defended from every angle with advanced degrees in highly technical areas. Further, our Litigation & Dispute Resolution team brings additional firepower to IP matters, frequently serving as trusted local counsel and reinforcing our ability to deliver comprehensive, strategic and unmatched solutions.
Broad and deep experience across industries
Our clients are sophisticated companies that understand the value and importance of protecting their ideas, technologies and brands. But we understand that each of your business needs, products and market contexts will be unique. Our experienced IP Litigation Practice Group advises household names across a range of industries, including:
- Biotechnology, pharmaceutical and life sciences
- Chemistry
- Medical devices
- Software and computer science
- Cellular and mobile communications
- Semiconductors
- Research institutions
- Consumer products
- Clothing and fashion
- Food and beverage
- Construction
- Outdoor equipment
- Energy
Experience
- Patent litigation
- Trademark litigation
- Copyright litigation
- Trade secret, unfair competition and deceptive trade practices litigation
- False advertising and right of publicity litigation
- Domain name disputes
- IP licensing litigation
Successes
- Obtained a court ordered dismissal with prejudice of a family of patents under Section 101 that were asserted against our client, a leading healthcare software company, by a non-practicing entity (aka patent troll). We successfully upheld the judgment before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals and subsequently secured nearly $1 million in attorneys’ fees against the plaintiff.
- Obtained a dismissal with prejudice of design patent infringement claims and dismissal of utility patent infringement claims brought against our client, a male grooming company, relating to personal shaving devices. The plaintiff asserted infringement of both utility and design patents under federal law. The court granted our client's motion to dismiss, agreeing that the plaintiff had failed to properly plead either infringement count. In dismissing the design patent claim with prejudice, the court held that a side-by-side comparison of the asserted design patent and accused product made clear that "no ordinary observer could determine the shavers are substantially the same or at least a colorable imitation thereof."
- Secured a complete dismissal with prejudice of all claims brought against our client, a toy manufacturer accused of misappropriating the plaintiff's likeness and name. The plaintiff asserted claims under the Lanham Act, Wisconsin's privacy statute and Wisconsin's common law of negligence. The court dismissed with prejudice the right of privacy and tort claims, as well as the claim for cancellation of our client's trademarks. We subsequently obtained a voluntary dismissal with prejudice of the remaining Lanham Act claim for no monetary consideration — an important victory for our client, which has faced increasing threats of claims alleging copying of individuals' names and likenesses.
- Defeated a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction brought against our client, a sportswear manufacturer, in opposition proceedings alleging trademark infringement, unfair competition under both federal and state law, and dilution under state law. The plaintiff alleged that our client willfully infringed his signature mark by selling apparel bearing certain designs that were purportedly confusingly similar. The court denied all injunctive relief sought to prevent our client from using the challenged designs in connection with the promotion, marketing, advertising, and sale of its products and services.
- Obtained a dismissal with prejudice of a Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) counterclaim asserted against our client in the Delaware Court of Chancery. The counterclaim-plaintiffs alleged that our client violated the CFAA under both an unauthorized-access theory and a damage theory, claiming our client improperly accessed electronic order-management and ERP platforms during a transition services period to cancel customer orders and divert business. The court granted our client's motion to dismiss, holding that the access theory failed under the Supreme Court's "gates-up-or-down" framework in Van Buren v. United States because our client was authorized to access the ordering systems under the parties' Transition Services Agreement. The court further held that the damage theory failed because the alleged conduct — using the ordering system to cancel orders — constituted ordinary business activity rather than the type of technological harm, such as corruption of files, that the CFAA was intended to cover.
