We defended EDA company Real Intent at trial in San Jose federal court against Synopsys’s copyright infringement claims related to the design and verification of integrated circuits. Synopsys also alleged that Real Intent breached several contractual agreements between the two companies by copying certain commands from Synopsys's software. The KVP team won a sweeping fair use victory on the copyright infringement claims at summary judgment, while the contract claim remained in the case at trial. The jury awarded Synopsys a tiny fraction of the millions of dollars Synopsys sought, and the Court further reduced the verdict post-trial.

We represented Google in defeating a patent infringement suit brought by B.E. Technology over targeted advertising technologies. After multiple claims were invalidated through inter partes review proceedings, the Delaware court then granted summary judgment on the final remaining claim, holding it invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act as directed to an abstract idea that lacked any inventive concept. The ruling resolved the case in full just weeks before trial.

We successfully defended cloud-based telephony and unified messaging provider Dialpad in a patent infringement action brought by competitor RingCentral in the Northern District of California. Dialpad obtained a ruling that all five asserted patents claim ineligible subject matter.

With GLAD Law and NCLR, we represent military families challenging the Department of Defense’s sudden decision to prohibit military clinics and hospitals from providing necessary medical care for transgender military dependents. The new policy also prohibits the military’s insurance plan from covering treatment for transgender young adults. We are proud to represent military families seeking to reinstate the healthcare they have relied upon for years.

We defended Varian Medical Systems, a world leader in radiotherapy medical devices for the treatment of cancer, in the District of Delaware against patent-infringement claims brought by Best Medical International.

On behalf of Instacart, we have successfully defended against numerous class and collective actions across the country alleging that that shoppers who use Instacart’s technology platform should be classified as employees rather than independent contractors. We have won a number of early dispositive motions in these cases, including motions to compel individual arbitration and to enforce class and collective action bars.

We defended Arista Networks in this groundbreaking case which raised the important question of whether and to what extent functional computer commands merit copyright protection. Cisco accused Arista, run by a former Cisco vice president, of copyright infringement for the use of more than 500 commands used to configure network switches. Cisco also accused Arista of infringing two patents, one of which it dismissed before trial. After a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in our client’s favor on both the copyright and patent claims.

We defended SanDisk from numerous patent assertions by Round Rock, including a total of 15 patents asserted in two separate litigations in the District of Delaware, and 12 patents asserted in another case in the Northern District of California. We prevailed in all adjudicated phases of the Delaware and California actions before the parties reached a broad settlement. In the California action, we secured final judgment in favor of SanDisk after obtaining a summary-judgment victory based on patent exhaustion. In the first Delaware phase, which culminated with a jury trial on two asserted patents, we obtained a defense verdict invalidating most asserted claims of both patents, and finding no infringement as to the other claims. In the next Delaware phase, a second jury trial was vacated after we obtained summary judgment invalidating claims from a third patent asserted by Round Rock. The other patents in the Delaware actions remained pending adjudication when the parties settled.

We represented Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) against Tela Innovations in the ITC and in the District of Delaware. Both cases concerned patents that relate to integrated circuit design. Tela attempted to prevent TSMC, the world’s leading pure play foundry, from working with its hundreds of US customers, including Apple and Qualcomm, to manufacture chips that are the heart of nearly every smartphone and television sold in the US. In the offensive case, TSMC asserted that Tela Innovations partnered with TSMC in order to learn about the company’s technology, which it used to build its own patents. After successfully briefing and arguing to limit the ITC investigation only to TSMC’s importations into the US, as opposed to TSMC’s customers, we negotiated a resolution between the two companies that resulted in TSMC purchasing a portion of Tela Innovations.

We served as lead counsel for Comcast in an eight-patent case brought by British Telecom in Delaware federal court. The case targeted Comcast's high speed data and telephony services and video encryption. We also asserted Comcast patents against British Telecom in Texas federal court. In Delaware, we prevailed on six of the eight patents by way of summary judgment and stipulated dismissals, and thereafter reached a very favorable resolution of both litigations.

We represented Comcast in a patent infringement case brought by C-Cation Technologies in the Eastern District of Texas, and a related breach of contract claim Comcast brought in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff targeted our clients' high speed data and telephony services and sought damages well into nine figures. We were selected as lead trial counsel for all defendants, which included three other cable companies. After several pre-trial victories, we reached a favorable settlement for all defendants.