Representative Cases

U.S. Courts of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court

• In re: John L. Couvaras, No. 2022-1489, 70 F.4th 1374 (Federal Circuit) (Lead counsel and presented oral argument) (appeal of PTAB rejection of patent application).

• In re: Joy Tea Inc., No. 2022-1041 (Federal Circuit) (Lead Counsel) (appeal of Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruling that intent-to-use trademark applicants are legally precluded from having a bona fide intent to use their mark in future commerce anticipated to be legal).

• Trimble Inv. et al v. PerDiemCo LLC, 997 F.3d 1147 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (Lead counsel and presented oral argument) (question of personal jurisdiction in patent declaratory judgment case).

• Swagway, LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 934 F.3d 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (Presented oral argument).

• ATEN Int’l Co. v. Uniclass Tech. Co., 932 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (Presented oral argument and revived client’s invalidated patent).

• ATEN Int’l Co. v. Uniclass Tech. Co., 932 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

• United States v. AT&T Inc. et al., No. 2018-5214 (DC Circuit) (Represented proposed amicus curiae Cinémoi North America as local counsel).

• Segway, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2018-1556 (Federal Circuit).

• Drop Stop LLC v. Zhu, 757 F. App’x 994 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

• Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp. Co., 790 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

• Daewoo Electronics America Inc. v. Opta Corporation et al, No. 17-1421 (U.S. Supreme Court) (Petition for Certiorari filed).

• Razor USA LLC et al. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2017-2591 (Federal Circuit) (Represented Intervenor Swagway, LLC).

• Triple Up Limited v. Youku Tudou Inc., No. 17-7033 (DC Circuit) (presented oral argument) (question of internet-related personal jurisdiction in copyright infringement case).

• Dragon Intellectual Property, LLC, v. DISH Network L.L.C., Sirius XM Radio Inc., Nos. 2016-2468, -2492 -2186 (Federal Circuit) (Appeal of PTAB finding of invalidity in inter partes review review no. IPR2015-00499).

• Adrian Rivera v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2016-1841 (Federal Circuit) (represented Intervenor Solofill, LLC and presented oral argument for affirmance of ITC determination of no violation).

• Daewoo Electronics America Inc. v. Opta Corporation et al., No. 2014-17498 (9th Circuit) (Represented appellees Opta Corp. et al concerning claim preclusion issue and presented oral argument).

• Creative Kingdoms, LLC. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2014-1072 (Federal Circuit) (Appeal of Section 337 Determination).

• Hinkle v. Shinseki, No. 2011-7094 (Federal Circuit) (Appeal of Veterans’ Claims decision) (Pro bono).
  

U.S. District Court Litigation

• Johnson v. Onika Tanya Maraj p/k/a Nicki Minaj et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-05061-PA (C.D. Cal.) (representing copyright infringement plaintiff).

• Shenzhen Happy Vaping Tech. Ltd., v. Logic Tech. Dev. LLC & Japan Tobacco Int'l. U.S.A., Inc., Case No. 0:22-CV-61407-SMITH (S.D. Fl.) (represented vaporizer patent infringement plaintiff through settlement).

• Kendrick v. Hann, Case No. 1:19-cv-01642 (M.D. Pa.) (pro bono representation of plaintiff at jury trial in prisoner’s rights case).

• E-Z Ink Inc., et al. v. Brother Industries, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-00564-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va.) (represented declaratory judgment plaintiffs in printer cartridge patent case relating to Amazon proceeding through settlement).

• Bestway Inflatables & Material Corp. v. The Entities Identified in Schedule A, Inc., Case No. 23-cv-4679 (N.D. Ill.) (Successfully negotiated settlement on behalf of represented defendant prior to filing answer).

• Yunda Health Tech. Tianjin Col., Ltd,. v. LG Electronics, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-08504-JWG (MAAx) (C.D. Cal.) (represented declaratory judgment plaintiffs in water filter patent case relating to Amazon proceeding and obtained early settlement).

• LG Electronics Inc., et al. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified in Schedule A, No. 1:21-CV-2600 (N.D. Ill.) (defended group of after-market refrigerator filter sellers in patent infringement case).

• JUUL Labs., Inc. v. Andy Chou et. al, No. 2:21-cv-03056 (C.D. Cal.) (Representing online sellers in trademark infringement defense).

• E-Z Ink Inc., et al. v. Brother Industries, Ltd., No. 1:21-cv-01109 (E.D. Va) ( Representing sellers of after-market printer cartridges in seeking declaratory judgment of patent invalidity).

• Brother Industries, Ltd. et al v. Linkyo Corp., No. 5:20-cv-02464 (C.D. Cal. 2020) (Successfully negotiated settlement of declaratory judgment suit on behalf of defendant prior to filing answer).

• Battery Conservation Innovations, LLC, v. Adesso, Inc., No 1:20-cv-00463-CFC (D. Del. 2020) (Successfully negotiated dismissal of patent infringement complaint without filing a response or any settlement by defendant).

• Microsoft Corp et al. v. Hon Hai d/b/a Foxconn Tech. Group, No 5:19-cv-01279-LHK (N.D. Cal) (Successfully represented Foxconn in patent license contact breach case through favorable settlement).

• WiniaDaewoo Electronics America Inc. v. Opta Corporation et al., No. 13-cv-01247 (N.D. Cal.) (Successfully represented Opta and related parties in alter ego/ successor liability suit dismissed at summary judgment stage).

• United States v. AT&T Inc. et al., No. 17-cv-2511 (D.D.C.) (Represented proposed amicus curiae Cinémoi North America as local counsel).

• ATEN International Co., Ltd. v. Uniclass Technology Co., Ltd. et al., No. 2:15-cv-04424 (C.D. Cal.) (Patent infringement litigation).

• Nader Asghari-Kamrani & Kamran Asghari-Kamrani v. United Services Automobile Association, No. 2:15-xv-00478 (E.D. Va, Norfolk Division) (Represented independent inventors in patent infringement suit).

• Becton, Dickinson and Company v. Insulet Corporation, No. 10-4371 (D. N.J)(2014) (Patent infringement suit).

• Boston Scientific Corp. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, No. 1:11-cv-0736 (S.D. Ind.) (2012) (Patent licensing dispute).

U.S. International Trade Commission Section 337 Investigations

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1392, Certain Oil Vaporizing Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (defending Respondent ALD, Group Limited—vaporizer manufacturer for Stiiizy Inc.— against patent infringement complaint brought by PAX Labs, Inc).

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1290, Certain Refrigerator Water Filtration Devices and Components Thereof.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1291 & -1292, Certain Replacement Automotive Lamps (represented Kia and Hyundai in design patent infringement case against after-market head light and tail light manufacturers).

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1139, Certain Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Components Thereof.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1123, Certain Carburetors and Products Containing Such Carburetors.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1107, Certain LED Lighting Devices and Components Thereof.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1000, Certain Motorized Self-Balancing Vehicles.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-974, Certain Aquarium Fittings and Parts Thereof.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-967, Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith.

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-876, Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS Devices) and Products Containing Same (represented subpoenaed third party in challenging discovery subpoena).

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-770, Certain Video Game Systems and Wireless Controllers and Components Thereof (represented Complainant Creative Kingdoms LLC in suit against Nintendo).

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-658, Certain Video Game Machines and Related Three-Dimensional Pointing Devices (represented Complainant Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc. in suit against Nintendo).

• ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-726, Certain Electronic Imaging Devices (represented Respondent Research In Motion, Ltd. (RIM) in suit brought by Flashpoint Technology Inc.).
  

Other Litigation Matters

• Jordim International, Inc. v. Pteris Global (USA) Inc.,  AAA Case No. 1-21-0016-3457 (lead counsel in contract dispute arbitration regarding construction of luggage carousels at Tampa, Fl. airport).

• Hiller, PC v. Women Grow LLC, Index No. 653637/2022 (Supreme Court of New York, NYC) (defending woman-focused cannabis industry group against former counsel regarding alleged unpaid legal bills). 

• Huizhou Faith Electric Manufacture Co., Ltd, v. Procuru et al., Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 12950357311 (successfully enforced GFCI patents against infringing sellers in Amazon dispute).

• Brother Kogoyo Kobushi Kaisha v. Linkyo Corp., Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 9346059031 (represented sellers of printer cartridges in Amazon dispute).

• Brother Kogoyo Kobushi Kaisha v. Linkyo Corp. et al., Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 9311404461 (represented sellers of printer cartridges in Amazon dispute).

• In re: Joy Tea Inc., Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) Appeal , Application Serial No.: 88640009 (appealing refusal to publish ITU (intent to use) Trademark on CBD beverage because such goods would currently run afoul of the Food Drug & Cosmetics Act) (click here for media coverage).

• Brother Kogoyo Kobushi Kaisha v. E-Z Ink, GPC Image, et al, Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 7526927771 (represented sellers of printer cartridges in Amazon dispute).

• Brother Kogoyo Kobushi Kaisha v. Effectrust et al, Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 7683452351 (represented sellers of printer cartridges in Amazon dispute).

• Brother Kogoyo Kobushi Kaisha v. Effectrust, E-Z Ink, Linkyo Corp, Amazon Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation Process Case No. 7121605801 (represented sellers of printer cartridges in Amazon dispute).

• FIH Co. Ltd v. Arcsoft, Inc., AAA Case No. 01-20-0007-3084 (Successfully represented claimant, a Foxconn subsidiary, in patent licensing dispute through favorable settlement).

• Robinson v. International House of Pancakes, No. 09-042009 (Circuit. Ct of 17th Dist., Broward County, Florida, Fifth Dist.) (Successfully represented plaintiff in tort case through favorable settlement).

• Carter v. Panero, No. 2012 E 0004178 H (D.C. Superior Court) (landlord-tenant matter) (pro bono).

• Rivera-Martinez v. Shinseki, No. 12-3613 (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) (pro bono).

• Moore v. Shinseki, No. 12-617 (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) (pro bono).

• Dowling v. Shinseki, No. 09-817 (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) (pro bono).

• Hinkle v. Shinseki, No. 09-515 (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) (pro bono).

Publications and Presentations

• Faculty, “Potential Ethical Pitfalls in Representing State-Legal Cannabis Industry Clients” (CLE Ethics Credit approved in numerous jurisdictions) westlegaledcenter.com , Jan. 10, 2024.

• Faculty, “Cannabis Industry Intellectual Property: IP Practice in the Slow Sunset of Federal Prohibition” (CLE Ethics Credit approved in numerous jurisdictions) westlegaledcenter.com , Dec. 20, 2023.

• Faculty, "IP Strategies, Enforcement Considerations, and Potential Pitfalls in the Cannabis Industry 2023 (Cannabis Law Series – Part Three),” DC Bar Association, Dec., 18, 2023.

• Co-Presenter, "In re JOY TEA and Cannabis Trademarks.” NYC Bar Trademark Committee, Oct. 18, 2022.

• Speaker, "Reading the Tea Leaves on Intellectual Property and Cannabis as Federal Prohibition Persists: In Re Joy Tea, Other Legal Developments, and Evolving Strategies for IP Procurement and Enforcement,” Cannabis Science Conference (Long Beach, CA) May 10, 2022.

• Author, “GW And Canopy Agree: Canopy Can’t Win Its Cannabis Extraction Patent Infringement Case Under Judge’s Interpretation,” Marijuana Moment, LLC. March 2, 2022 (click here for link).

• Author, “GW Pharma Scores Interim Victory In Cannabis Extraction Patent Infringement Fight With Canopy,” Marijuana Moment, LLC. Dec. 2, 2021 (click here for link).

• Panelist, “Cannabis IP Litigation Update: An overview of recent cases and trends in cannabis intellectual property litigation, including patent, trademark, and trade secret, and a discussion on best practices for litigation cannabis IP matters.”, International Cannabis Bar Association (INCBA) November 10, 2021 (2 PM ET).

• Faculty, Cannabis Law Series: IP Strategies, Enforcement Considerations, and Potential Pitfalls in the Cannabis Industry, DC Bar Association. November 3, 2021.

• Faculty, “Representing Cannabis Industry Clients: IP Strategies and Attorney Ethics,” (CLE Ethics Credit approved in numerous jurisdictions) Lawline.com. October 14, 2021.

• Speaker, “Evolving Intellectual Property Protections and Threats in the Cannabis Space,” 2021 Cannabis Science Conference East, Baltimore, MD, Sept. 15, 2021.

• Speaker, “IP Strategies, Enforcement Considerations, and Potential Ethical Pitfalls in Virginia’s Anticipated (Quasi-)Legal Cannabis Industry,” (Approved for CLE Ethics Credit) (CLE credit not available from recorded presentation), Virginia State Bar, IP Section. May 11, 2021.

• Co-Presenter, “Strategic and Technical IP Essentials for Entrepreneurs, Emerging Companies, & VCs,” Defense Entrepreneurs Forum, December 16, 2021.

• Author, “What 18 Months Of IPR Stats Teach Us About Winning Appeals”, Law360, July 20, 2020. Click here for a PDF copy.

• Author, “Litigating FRAND Rates After Fed. Cir. Ericsson Decision,” Law360, Jan. 17, 2020. Click here for a PDF copy.

• Author, “What Statistical Analysis Reveals About Winning IPR Appeals,” Law360, Aug. 8, 2019. Click here for a PDF copy.

• Speaker on IP Issues, “BEVNET & NOSH Present: A Cannabis Forum For Food & Beverage,” New York, NY, June 14, 2019.

• Speaker, “IP Strategies, Enforcement Considerations, and Potential Ethical Pitfalls in the Burgeoning (Quasi-)Legal Cannabis Industry,” New Jersey Intellectual Property Law Association (NJIPLA): Ethics in IP Seminar. Iselin, NJ, Dec. 6, 2018.

• Author, “What Cannabis Entrepreneurs Need To Know About Intellectual Property,” Marijuana Moment, LLC. June 14, 2018 (click here for link).

• Speaker, “Best Intellectual Property Practices for Bringing New Textile Technology Product to Market: A Primer for Engineers, Business People, and Research Scientists,” Techtextil North America, Atlanta, GA, May 13, 2014.

• Coauthor. “Why Not Throw in the Design of the Kitchen Sink?: The Tricks and Traps of Including Designs in Omnibus Patent Applications,” The Intellectual Property Strategist, Oct. 2013.

• Coauthor. “Trademark Licensees May Be Barred from Challenging the Licensor’s Ownership of the Mark,” LES Insights, Oct. 24, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Patent Licenses Are Presumed to Include Continuation Patents When Same Products Are at Issue,” LES Insights, Sept. 19, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Cross License Agreements Had Only Tenuous Relevance to Determining Reasonably Royalty Damages and Were Not Required to Be Produced,” LES Insights, July 11, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Declaratory Judgment Action Challenging Patent Validity and Infringement Was Dismissed Despite a Patent Owner’s Statement that the Plaintiff’s Product May Infringe Certain Patents,” LES Insights, May 16, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Terminating a License Agreement Precludes Recovering Post-Judgment Royalties Under the Agreement,” LES Insights, March 14, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Licensee Breaches License Agreement by Allowing Its Law Firm Access to the Licensed Technology,” LES Insights, Feb. 14, 2011.

• Coauthor. “Judges Diverge on Use of Patent License Negotiations to Determine a Reasonable Royalty,” LES Insights, Dec. 6, 2010.

• Coauthor. “A Proposal to Remove Uncertainty from Claims of Small Entity Status before the USPTO by Correcting and Enhancing SBA and USPTO Regulations,” Bloomberg Law Reports, Jan. 19, 2010.

Education

• J.D., with high honors, Order of the Coif, George Washington University Law School

• B.S.E., with distinction, Biomedical and Electrical Engineering, Duke University

Admissions

• California

• District of Columbia

• U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

• U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

• U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

• U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

• U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit

• U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

• U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

• U.S. Court of Federal Claims

• U.S. Supreme Court

Professional Recognition

• Recognized in the Washington, DC “Rising Stars” list for Intellectual Property Litigation, Super Lawyers magazine (2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019).