Intellectual Property

Uber in securing dismissal of a patent infringement case alleging that Uber’s user application infringed Halio Technologies’ automated dispatch and payment system patent. 

Google in securing summary judgment based on non-infringement and further granting Google’s motion for monetary sanctions in a patent infringement suit brought in the Southern District of Texas by SuperSpeed Software, alleging that “Google Docs” and “Google Drive” infringed two data access patents that SuperSpeed incorporated into software used to accelerate the performance of computers linked to a shared-disk network. 

MV3 Partners in securing a victory in a claim construction hearing against streaming media company Roku for patent infringement in the Western District of Texas.  As alleged in the complaint, Roku earns hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and profit selling streaming media players and smart TVs nationwide that incorporate MV3’s patented invention.

Google, Motorola, LG and ASUS in successfully securing a complete dismissal on behalf of all clients in a patent infringement case alleging Android-based smartphones and wearables infringed a device security patent.  Prior to the dismissal, Kasowitz secured a critical and rarely achieved motion to transfer venue, from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California, following a one-day evidentiary hearing on behalf of all clients. 

Fintiv in defeating Apple’s motion to transfer venue of Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc. from the Western District of Texas to the Northern District of California.  The complaint in the action alleges that Apple Wallet and the Apple Watch infringe Fintiv’s patent relating to the management of virtual cards stored on mobile devices.

Google in securing a complete dismissal in a patent infringement challenge brought by Data Engine Technologies in the District of Delaware.  Data Engine alleged that Google Sheets infringed patents which purportedly covered the Quattro Pro for Windows® spreadsheet program sold by Borland Software Corporation.  Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark found that the asserted claims were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter and thus invalid, and granted Google’s motion to dismiss.  This matter originally began as a six-patent case against Google, which Kasowitz successfully reduced to three patents.

ASUS in various patent infringement cases involving a voice-based digital assistant for electronic devices, adaptive antennas, beam switching technologies, and a Multi-Input Multi-Output Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing system.

Google in a patent infringement case in California federal court in which Google seeks a declaration that it has not infringed Eolas Technologies’ patent covering interactive web browser functions.  The Federal Circuit granted Google a rare writ of mandamus, confirming that the judge in the initial ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas had unfairly committed a “patently erroneous error” against Google.  The Federal Circuit’s decision allowed Google to transfer the case to the Northern District of California.  This is the third case involving Google and Eolas in which Kasowitz has served as trial counsel for Google.  

• Kasowitz served as trial counsel for Google and YouTube in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement action brought by Eolas and the University of California.  Kasowitz secured a jury verdict of patent invalidity, defeating claims for hundreds of millions in damages and injunctive relief.  The verdict was hailed in the media, including “Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Troll’s Claim to Own the Interactive Web,” by Wired.com.  
• Kasowitz represented Google in a patent infringement case brought in California federal court in which Google and J.C. Penney sought declarations that they have not infringed two Eolas patents covering interactive web browser functions.  The case ultimately settled favorably.

Google in a patent infringement case alleging that Google Drive infringed Hall Data’s database synchronization patent.  Kasowitz won a motion to transfer venue, from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California.

LG in a seven-patent infringement case involving USB chargers in the Eastern District of Texas.  Plaintiff Fundamental Innovation Systems licensed the patents-in-suit from Blackberry, and is asserting infringement against several high-profile companies, including Samsung, Huawei and ZTE.

Adobe customers (e.g. Bed Bath & Beyond, QVC, J.C. Penney, Kohl’s Corporation and Dillard’s) in a patent infringement case alleging infringement of Tejas’s image file formatting patent.  By utilizing the customer-suit exception, Kasowitz filed a declaratory judgment action in the Northern District of California against Tejas.  This rarely utilized exception allowed Kasowitz to secure a victory on behalf of Adobe and its customers. 

Reddit in a patent infringement case that alleges Reddit, as well as 50 other Amazon customers including Airbnb and Square, use Ruby on Rails software implementing the HTTP web protocol, as well as Amazon Simple Storage Service.

Verizon in numerous patent infringement matters involving cellular communication hand-offs, cellular phone hotspot technology, data transmission protocols, network extender products, audio communication systems for computer networks and interactive media guides.

Adobe in a patent infringement matter alleging numerous high-profile companies, including technology giants Apple and Hewlett Packard, violated PanTaurus’ patent describing a secure computer system.

Recreational Equipment (REI) in a patent infringement action as part of a joint defense group that included Staples, L.L. Bean, Dillard’s, Drugstore.com, HSN, J.C. Penney, and Rhapsody.  The case settled favorably.

Zydus and Cadila Healthcare in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action involving a generic version of IMBRUVICA®.

Zydus in two Hatch-Waxman patent infringement actions involving a generic version of INVOKANA® and INVOKAMET®.

Watson Pharmaceuticals (now Teva) in Hatch-Waxman patent litigations relating to a number of drugs, including Ultracet®, Aplenzin®, Renvela®, Intuniv®, and WelChol® in the District of Delaware, the District of New Jersey, the Southern District of Florida and the Northern District of California.

Cambridge Security Seals in trade secret litigation.  Successfully obtained full dismissal of claims for false advertising and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act and state law claims for unfair and deceptive business practices, intentional interference with business relations, and conspiracy to misappropriate trade secrets.  Successfully convinced the jury that plaintiff’s purported damages were overstated and persuaded the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that plaintiff was pursuing damages that have never been recognized under New York law.

Purolite in its action for trade secret misappropriation against competitor Thermax, relating to stolen manufacturing formulae.  We successfully obtained $38 million for Purolite.

FinancialApps, a developer of software allowing financial service companies to evaluate credit risk, in its lawsuit against Envestnet, a $3 billion wealth management software provider, and its subsidiary Yodlee, alleging theft of FinApps’ valuable proprietary information and trade secrets to unlawfully develop software products that compete with FinApps.

Florida MCBD, a company comprised of experienced cannabis cultivators and distributors, in its complaint alleging that Columbia Care and its founders conspired with MCBD’s joint venture partner, Sun Bulb, to fraudulently misappropriate MCBD’s rights to a Florida medical cannabis treatment license worth tens of millions of dollars and steal its trade secrets for the operation of defendants’ Florida medical cannabis business. Kasowitz defeated defendants’ motion to dismiss in New York State court.

Modern Creative Services in an action against Dell in federal district court in New Jersey arising from, among other things, Dell's misappropriation of trade secrets in using MCS's product advisor software tool on its website. Following extensive discovery, Dell’s motion for summary judgment was denied.  The case ultimately settled.

XPO Logistics and GXO Logistics in multiple state and federal court litigations stemming from disputes over warehouse management services contracts, transportation contracts, theft of trade secrets and non-compete agreements.

Insight Global, a national staffing company, in reaching a successful settlement of litigation brought in the Southern District of New York against a national competitor arising out of the competitor’s alleged employee-poaching scheme and misappropriation of Insight Global’s trade secrets.