Patent Litigation

• PACid Technologies, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., et al. (W.D. Tex.)

  Represented plaintiff PACid Technologies in patent infringement litigation against Bank of America relating to biometric user authentication and secure network communications.  The matter settled favorably for a confidential sum.  

• TOT Power Control, S.L. v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al. (W.D. Tex.)

  Representing TOT Power Control in its patent infringement litigation against AT&T, T-Mobile, Nokia, and Ericsson involving wireless communication power control technology.

• Phelan Group v. Toyota et al. (E.D. Tex.)

  Representing Phelan in enforcement of its patents relating to driver safety technology.  Attained early, favorable settlements in actions against accused automakers.

• Preservation Technologies Patent Infringement Litigation (W.D. Tex., C.D. Cal., & D. Del.)

  Representing Preservation Technologies in enforcement of patents developed by the University of Southern California relating to architecture and techniques for indexing, accessing, distributing, and surveying multimedia data.  Attained favorable settlements in prior actions against multiple accused infringers, including Netflix, DISH, Facebook, Sony, and Hulu, after securing favorable discovery and pleading-stage rulings.

• Appliance Computing III, Inc. d/b/a Surefield v. Redfin Corp. (W.D. Tex.)

  Trial counsel for Surefield in a jury trial alleging Redfin’s infringement of patents related to 3D virtual tour technology, after successfully defeating related inter partes petitions.

• Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., K.G. v. Apple, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., PTAB, Fed. Cir.)

  Trial and appellate counsel for Papst enforcing patents related to high data rate, device-independent information transfer against multiple cell phone manufacturers. Trial court denied motion to transfer venue and appeal court denied mandamus. DiNovo Price navigated the filing of twenty-three (23) IPRs of data transfer technology patents by nine (9) accused infringers, securing non-institution of many petitions and resulting in survival of patentable claims asserted in litigation. Obtained a $5.9 million jury verdict against Samsung and settled favorably while appeal pending.

• Human Differential Intelligence, LLC Patent Litigation (W.D. Tex.)

  Represented Human Differential Intelligence in enforcement of patents relating to CAPTCHAs; cases settled favorably after DiNovo Price obtained claims construction order in its favor and defeated multiple motions to dismiss.

• Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG v. Altera Corp., Xilinx, Inc. (Fed. Cir., N.D. Cal., & D. Del.)

  Represented Papst in enforcement of patents related to generating and verifying tests for memory devices. Obtained dismissal of declaratory judgment action brought by accused infringer and represented patent owner in appeals of dismissal and patentability pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101.  

• Thomas C. Sisoian v. International Business Machines Corp. (W.D. Tex.)

  Represented Thomas C. Sisoian in an action for misappropriation of trade secrets relating to adaptive object-model software by former employee.  Attained a favorable settlement after defeating IBM’s summary judgment motion.

• Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Adobe Systems Inc. et al. (Fed. Cir. & N.D. Cal.)

  Represented Digital Reg in action alleging infringement of patents related to digital rights management, including a jury trial and subsequent appeal against Adobe.  Attained multiple favorable settlements.   

• Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Facebook, Inc. (Fed. Cir., PTAB, & N.D. Cal.)

  Represented Software Rights Archive in enforcement of patents relating to internet search technology and algorithms resulting in multiple favorable settlements; PTAB issued favorable final written decision in inter partes review proceeding affirming validity of infringed claims that was overturned on appeal in a 2-1 decision.

• Infinity Computer Products, Inc. v. Toshiba America Business Solutions, Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal., E.D. Pa., D. Del., E.D.N.Y., & E.D. Ky.)

  Trial and appellate counsel for Infinity Computer Products in litigations enforcing patents related to methods for transferring print and scan data between a fax machine and computer; attained favorable settlement.
   

• Biochemistry and Protein Engineering, Confidential Matter (W.D. Wis.)

  Prior to joining the firm, Nicki served as part of a team that defended one of world’s largest chemical companies in a patent infringement case relating to genetically engineered enzymes used to make fuel ethanol.  The trial court invalidated the patent for lack of written description.  Ruling upheld on appeal.

• Internet Search and Algorithms, Confidential Matter (E.D. Tex.)

  Prior to joining the firm, Nicki served as part of the trial team that represented a large research university and its exclusive licensee in a patent infringement suit against a Fortune 50 computerized search company.  Case settled favorably after jury selection.   

• Biotechnology Tools, Confidential Matter (AAA Arbitration)

  Prior to joining the firm, Nicki co-authored the winning baseball-style arbitration brief on behalf of a global biotechnology tools company in a $100 million AAA arbitration over earnout provisions in a merger agreement and attained a complete defense award.  

• Trade Secrets, Confidential Matter (Tex. Dist.—Harris County)

  Prior to joining the firm, Nicki co-led representation of an international oilfield services company in connection with a former employee’s theft of trade secrets; attained a temporary restraining order, favorable settlement, and assignment of patent rights.

• Wind Turbine Generator, Confidential Matter (ITC)

  Prior to joining the firm, Nicki assisted in a successful trial of an International Trade Commission investigation on behalf of Fortune 50 company; ALJ ultimately found a Section 337 violation.

• Bandspeed, Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., et al. (W.D. Tex.)

  Represented plaintiff hardware company in a patent litigation relating to Bluetooth communications against numerous integrated circuit manufacturers. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.

• Parity Networks LLC v. Nokia Solutions and Networks US, LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex.)

  Represented computer networking client in series of infringement cases implicating multiple patent families relating to switching and routing technology and protocols.

• Encore Media Metrics LLC v. Google Inc., et al. (261st Judicial District, Travis County, Texas)

  Represented web analytics provider as plaintiff in trade secret litigation relating to internet advertising analytics against a large competitor. The matter settled favorably for a confidential sum.

• TecSec, Incorporated v. Microsoft Corporation, et al. (E.D. Va.)

  Represented patent owner in case involving allegations of patent infringement regarding data encryption, breach of contract, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation.

• Norman IP Holdings, LLC v. Lexmark International, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.)

  Handled highly-successful enforcement effort regarding portfolio of microprocessor and power control patents.

• eWatch, Inc. v. Apple Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.)

  Represented plaintiff hardware and software company in patent litigation relating to image capture, storage, and transmission against numerous manufacturers of camera phones. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.

• Maxient, LLC v. Symplicity Corp., et al. (E.D. Virginia)

  Represented startup company in enforcing software trade secrets against larger rival.

• No Magic, Inc. v. Thales E-Security, Inc. (E.D. Tex.)

  Represent plaintiff software company in patent litigation relating to data encryption against several manufacturers of hardware security modules.

• ComCam International, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., et al. (E.D. Tex.)

  Represent patent owner in patent litigation relating to video-based monitoring systems against several manufacturers and providers of home security systems.

• Futurevision.com, LLC. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex., D. Del.)

  Represented pioneering interactive television service provider in patent litigation against leading service providers.

• Bandspeed, Inc. v. Sony Electronics, Inc., et al. (W.D. Tex.)

  Represented plaintiff hardware company in patent and antitrust litigation relating to Bluetooth communications against 45 hardware manufacturers and a standards setting organization. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.

• Microlog Corp. v. InContact, Inc., et al. (D. Del.)

  Represented plaintiff software company in patent litigation relating to call center software against several providers of call center services and manufacturers of call center systems.

• Cell and Network Selection LLC v. AT&T Inc. (E.D. Tex.)

  Represented technology company in enforcing patents relating to cellular tower selection by mobile phones.