Overview
The growing integration of various processing and data generation technologies and services in almost every technology area and business marketplace highlights the advantage of partnering with a full-service intellectual property law firm like Knobbe Martens.
Deep Technical Bench Strength
With more than 50 attorneys who have relevant degrees in the electrical engineering, computer engineering, and computer science fields, Knobbe’s technical “bench strength” is exemplified by our deep knowledge of hardware, software, algorithms, semiconductor manufacturing, wireless technology, networking technology, machine learning technologies and applications, distributed ledger technologies (e.g., Blockchain) and applications, IoT technologies and applications, and other emerging technologies.
Strategic Resource and Partner
With Knobbe Martens as a strategic resource and partner, clients gain an advantage knowing we can delve into any technology. They know we can speak with engineers, inventors, vendors, in-house counsel, executives, and investors. Whether we are visiting design studios, manufacturing facilities, and Board rooms, or reviewing disclosure documents, white papers, and pitch materials, we can speak our clients’ technical language in a manner that supports their strategic business goals.
Value-Based IP Strategies
Additionally, our holistic, business-centric approach to patent portfolio development helps us identify value-based intellectual property strategies that best support the business, future, and money raising of our clients.
Extensive Litigation Success
When disputes and controversies arise, we combine our technical knowledge with our proven litigation skills to successfully litigate electrical, computer, semiconductor, and consumer electronics cases across a wide spectrum of technology. We represent plaintiffs and defendants in U.S. District Courts and before the Federal Circuit and before the PTAB and USITC.
We also work with standardization organizations, patent pools and related licensing entities/programs, and have an expansive growing international practice in Europe, Japan, and Korea. Additionally, we help our clients with data rights and data privacy issues that are ever present in most (if not all) technology fields.
Among our clients are medical device company Masimo, electronics company Toshiba, and retailer Amazon.
Built-In Efficiencies
Overall, our culture of stability and deep reservoir of knowledge and experience allows us to provide you with better teamwork and collaboration, to learn your issues faster, and to offer you greater efficiencies with lower team turnover.
Representative Experience
Masimo Corp. v. Philips Elec. N. A. Corp. and Philips Medizin Systeme Boblingen GmbH
Represented Masimo in a three-week jury trial involving multiple patents directed to complex digital signal processing algorithms used in medical devices. The patents covered electrical hardware and computer software features. Obtained a jury verdict of over $466 million for lost-profits damages against Philips for infringing two Masimo patents. The jury verdict was one the largest verdicts of the year. The jury also rejected Philips’ infringement claims in their entirety. Philips sought $169 million in damages and was awarded $0.
Toshiba America, Inc., and Toshiba Corp.
In 2017, Reversible Connections LLC sued Toshiba and several other computer manufacturers alleging that USB Type-C connectors infringed a patent owned by Walletex Microelectronics Ltd. The PTAB ultimately agreed with Toshiba and found all the claims unpatentable as anticipated or obvious, and denied the patent owner’s contingent motion to amend the patent claims. Walletex appealed the Board’s denial of the motion to amend to the Federal Circuit. On May 10, 2021, the Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 judgment affirming the PTAB’s final written decision.
Advanced Thermal Sciences Corp. v. Applied Materials, Inc.
Achieved a sweeping bench trial victory for Advanced Thermal, a BE Aerospace subsidiary. The court found that Applied Materials breached a joint development agreement by filing 10 patent applications on temperature control systems for semiconductor fabrication equipment, and that Advanced Thermal was the sole inventor and owner of other patents. The court also awarded Advanced Thermal its entire attorneys’ fees request.
Vocalife Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-123 (E.D. Tex.), No. 2021-1937 (Fed. Cir.)
Defended Amazon.com in a patent infringement case against Amazon’s Echo smart speakers. The team obtained favorable constructions of two claim terms on which Amazon based its non-infringement defenses and drafted a successful motion for partial summary judgment that eliminated the bulk of the plaintiff’s alleged damages before trial. On appeal to the Federal Circuit, the team secured a complete victory by prevailing on non-infringement.
StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. v. SecureAuth Corporation
Knobbe Martens successfully defended SecureAuth in a patent infringement case where StrikeForce asserted three patents. StrikeForce previously asserted its patents against numerous defendants in Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia. SecureAuth was the last defendant to be sued on the patents, but the first to prevail—in a complete victory that the Federal Circuit affirmed in February 2019. Knobbe Martens first prevailed on an early motion to dismiss StrikeForce’s complaint on the grounds that the three asserted patents were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The district court granted SecureAuth’s motion and invalidated all 43 asserted claims, ending the litigation and allowing SecureAuth to stay focused on delivering value to its customers. StrikeForce appealed the district court’s decision to the Federal Circuit. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed SecureAuth’s judgment of invalidity on all the asserted claims.