Patent- AT&T Corporation v. Microsoft Corporation—presented AT&T's patent infringement case against Microsoft to a jury, following a favorable Markman patent claim construction ruling. The case settled on confidential terms shortly after AT&T rested its case.
- Broadcom v. Qualcomm Incorporated—represented Qualcomm in key areas of its worldwide, four-year patent dispute with Broadcom, including last year's trial with the International Trade Commission (ITC), one of its largest to date. Cooley also represented Qualcomm in the resulting settlement and multi-year patent agreement with the company. As a result of the settlement, all litigation between the companies was dismissed with prejudice, including the patent infringement claims in the ITC and U.S. District Court in Santa Ana. Broadcom also withdrew its complaints to the European Commission and the Korea Fair Trade Commission. Under the agreement, the companies have granted certain rights to each other under their respective patent portfolios.
- Ericsson v. Qualcomm Incorporated—represented Qualcomm, the primary advocate of a new, alternative cellular standard known as CDMA, in a major patent litigation victory against Ericsson, the purveyor of an older, European cellular standard. Industry analysts identified this case as pivotal in determining the direction of digital communications into the 21st century.
- GlaxoSmithKline v. Excel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.—case settled very favorably for our client Excel Pharmaceuticals after remand from the Federal Circuit for further proceedings on doctrine of equivalence in light of Supreme Court's Festo decision.
- Gray Matter Holdings, LLC/Swimways v. Aqua-Leisure Industries, Inc.—represented the plaintiffs in this patent infringement, trade dress infringement, and tortious interference case involving a consumer leisure product. The case settled after defendant stipulated to a permanent injunction.
- Lans v. Gateway—obtained a complete dismissal and an award of attorney's fees for Gateway, after uncovering an unrecorded assignment of the patent-in-suit.
- Monolithic Power Systems v. O2 Micro International—secured an important defense jury victory for clients Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPS), Asustek Computer Inc. (ASUS), and Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp. (ASMC) in a multi-million dollar, bet-the-company patent dispute in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California. The case was part of a seven-year, worldwide dispute between MPS and competitor O2 Micro International Ltd. Cooley also helped defeat an appeal of the decision and request for rehearing en banc (Monolithic Power Sys., Inc. v. O2 Micro Int'l Ltd., 2009 WL 539910 (Fed. Cir. March 5, 2009 and May 22, 2009)).
- Nokia v. Qualcomm Incorporated—represented Qualcomm as trial counsel in a patent license dispute with Nokia Corp. Qualcomm alleged that Nokia's continued use of Qualcomm's patents after April 9, 2007, constituted an election by Nokia to extend its license under the parties' existing agreement at the same royalty rate. Nokia countersued alleging that Qualcomm should be enjoined from seeking injunctions based upon its FRAND declaration, which gave Nokia an implied license and that Qualcomm's royalty rate was not FRAND. These were issues of first impression. The case settled at the start of trial and resulted in a 15-year license agreement between Qualcomm and Nokia.
- SGI v. NVIDIA—the patentee offered a favorable settlement to NVIDIA following closing arguments to jury.
- Vixel, Inc. v. Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. and Vixel, Inc. v. QLogic Corporation—both cases settled following Vixel's acquisition by Emulex Corporation.
Copyright & Trademark- Marvel Enterprises v. NCsoft Corporation—we successfully defended NCsoft from claims that the popular online game City of Heroes encouraged infringement of Marvel's intellectual property
- Gentry v. eBay—the Court ordered that eBay was immune under the Communications Decency Act for third-party information posted on eBay's website.
- eBay Inc.—we protect eBay's trademarks worldwide and have successfully halted numerous users of copycat trademarks.
- WhenU.com, Inc.—we successfully defended WhenU in a series of cases brought by Website owners who claimed that WhenU's online advertising infringed their trademarks and copyrights. In 1-800 Contacts v. WhenU, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the advertising generated by WhenU's proprietary software did not "use" the plaintiff's trademark as a matter of law, reversed the district court's preliminary injunction order and directed it to dismiss the trademark infringement claims with prejudice.
- WhenU.com v. Utah—we obtained a preliminary injunction in Utah state court against the Utah "Spyware Control Act" on the ground that it is unconstitutional.
- Napster LLC—we managed all aspects of Napster's seminal copyright litigation in federal district court in San Francisco, successfully arguing that sufficient evidence of copyright misuse by the plaintiffs existed to warrant full-fledged discovery on the issue of whether the recording industry plaintiffs were barred from accusing Napster of contributory copyright infringement.
- SCI Games v. Eidos Interactive—our team defeated an emergency motion in both the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which sought to prohibit Eidos Interactive from releasing its new video game.
- PetSmart, Inc.—we helped PetSmart build an international trademark portfolio and enforce its trademark rights around the world. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment of noninfringement in PetSmart's favor despite identical marks used by competitors.
- Medical Research Institute, Inc.—in this trademark counterfeiting case involving ingestible nutritional supplements, we obtained an ex parte TRO and executed the seizure of counterfeit merchandise.
Trade Secret & Technology - Ichor Medical Systems v. CytoPulse Sciences—a jury awarded $14.3 million to Ichor, including $400,000 in punitive damages, for trade secret misappropriation and breach of a nondisclosure agreement.
- NVIDIA v. Microsoft—after we completed the second phase of a trifurcated arbitration concerning NVIDIA's graphics chip, the case settled on favorable terms for NVIDIA.
- Cadence Design Systems v. Avant!—Cadence defeated the defendant's antitrust counterclaims and securee over $200 million in restitution.
- eBay, Inc.—Cooley represented eBay in its case against Bidder's Edge, where we applied the novel theory of trespass to chattels, thus preventing the use of eBay auction listings on a competitive site. The Firm is pursuing other cases involving such electronic interference and recently won a ruling in an Illinois federal court for ShopLocal LLC, giving the company the okay to pursue an unjust enrichment claim against Cairo, Inc.'s use of "scrapers" to access ShopLocal's Web pages for commercial purposes.
- National Semiconductor—a preliminary injunction that we obtained under the inevitable disclosure doctrine, prevented a core group of high-level former engineers from using National Semiconductor's trade and business secrets at a competitor.
- Ingenient Technologies, Inc. v. PacketVideo Corporation, Christopher Johnson and David Nicozisin—in this technology and software trade secret/copyright case, we defeated demands for expedited discovery and preliminary injunction on behalf of the defendants.
- SpectraLink Corporation v. John Does 1 – 100—on behalf of the plaintiff in this trade secret misappropriation and defamation case against unknown individuals who posted confidential and defamatory materials on a Yahoo! chat room, we obtained the identities of the anonymous posters.
|