Cases
Representative Cases: Spirit AeroSystems v. Gulfstream (AAA/ICDR Arbitration, New York, NY): Represented Spirit AeroSystems against Gulfstream. Both parties alleged hundreds of millions of dollars of breach of contract damages. After a three-week arbitration hearing that included opening statements
testimony from dozens of witnesses, the case settled on favorable terms before the Panel issued a ruling.
LoggerHead v. Sears: (N.D. Illinois)
Represented LoggerHead against Sears
Apex in a lawsuit alleging patent infringement, trademark infringement
several tort claims arising from Sears' sales of Craftsman Max Axess Locking Wrenches. After eight-day trial, won jury verdict of patent infringement,
won jury verdict of willful infringement, entitling LoggerHead to treble damages on top of the $5.97 million award. In post-trial briefing, the court granted a new trial
briefing continues.
IGT v. Aristocrat: (D. Nev.)
Represented IGT in 32-patent litigation relating to Aristocrat's breach of contract
infringement of IGT's patents on gaming inventions,
Aristocrat's allegations of infringement. After filing briefing on claim construction, case settled on favorable terms.
Administradora v.: E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.: (Florida, Miami Dade County State Court)
Represented DuPont in three-week jury trial of product liability action involving Benlate fungicide. Plaintiff, a large Costa Rican citrus producer, claimed $42 million damages. The jury found plaintiff 60% contributorily negligent
awarded substantially reduced damages, resulting in an award of a small fraction of plaintiff's claim. Case settled on favorable terms.
Rolls-Royce v. United Technologies: (E.D. Virginia)
Represented United Technologies
its Pratt & Whitney division in an alleged multi-billion dollar patent case brought by Rolls-Royce in the Eastern District of Virginia. The technology at issue related to the jet engines (particularly the fan blades) used on the world's largest airplane, the Airbus A380, as well as a host of other airplanes. Rolls-Royce sought almost $4 billion in damages
an injunction preventing further sales of the accused engines. The Court granted summary judgment in United Technologies' favor, finding that United Technologies' engines did not infringe the Rolls-Royce patent. This ruling was the culmination of a string of successes in which United Technologies also won summary judgment of no willful infringement (by which Rolls-Royce was seeking treble damages up to over $11 billion)
the Court struck Rolls-Royce's damages theory. In the ruling precluding Rolls-Royce's damages theory, the Court found that Rolls-Royce's multi-billion dollar price erosion
lost profits damages is based on misstatements of the law, a lack of sound evidence,
unsupported economic assumptions,
its paid up royalty theory is similarly flawed. [Rolls-Royce's expert's] report reads more like a lawyer's brief advocating for the highest conceivable damages award rather than an expert trying to assist the trier of fact reach a reasonable damages figure. Because of this extensive overreaching, the entire report is undermined.
Phoenix v. DIRECTV: (Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
Central District of California)
Represented DIRECTV in a patent infringement suit filed in the Central District of California. The accused technology involved the Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system that answers customer calls. Plaintiff Phoenix Solutions claimed over $40 million in damages. After a Markman hearing
discovery, DIRECTV moved for summary judgment on the ground that it outsourced its IVR to a third-party vendor
therefore could not be liable for direct infringement. The district court agreed, holding that DIRECTV is not liable for an infringing 'use' of the asserted claims because it does not exercise the requisite direction or control over the way that [the vendors] configure
operate the Accused Technology. Phoenix appealed. Two days after oral argument, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued a per curiam decision affirming summary judgment for DIRECTV. DirecTV Didn't Infringe Recognition IP.
TicoFrut v. DuPont: (Miami-Dade County, Florida)
Represented DuPont in jury trial of product liability claims involving the fungicide Benlate . TicoFrut, the main citrus grower
processor in Costa Rica, sued DuPont claiming that Benlate hurt the production of orange trees in Costa Rica. TicoFrut sought $172 million compensatory damages
an undisclosed amount of punitive damages. Trial lasted six weeks in Miami-Dade County Court. The jury deliberated for five hours before returning a verdict for DuPont, finding no liability. Jury Clears DuPont .
Stein v. Windsor Energy, et al: (District Court, Goodhue County, Minnesota)
Represented former Minnesota Timberwolves CEO Bob Stein in a case relating to certain silica s
deposits in Goodhue County, Minnesota. Mr. Stein filed the case seeking a declaratory judgment that he still owns half the rights to the silica s
. Mr. Stein also alleged that defendant Windsor Energy (
its related companies) had intentionally interfered with his contract with the l
owner. In April 2013, the Court granted Mr. Stein's request for a declaratory judgment. Then in June 2013, after a week-long trial, a jury found that Windsor Energy had intentionally interfered with Mr. Stein's contract with the l
owner. Should the s
be mined in the future, Mr. Stein will be entitled to his portion of the proceeds.
Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bayer, et al.: (N.D. Cal.)
Represented Bayer entities in breach of contract
breach of fiduciary duty suit in the Northern District of California. Onyx claimed entitlement to profits from regorafenib, Bayer's newest potential anti-cancer drug. Case settled favorably in second week of jury trial. Onyx sues Bayer for rights to Nexavar spinoff.
Attorney General of Canada v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc. et al.: (Northern District of New York)
Represented Canadian government in prosecution of civil RICO claim against R.J. Reynolds seeking more than $1 billion in damages caused by tobacco companies' scheme to smuggle tobacco into Canada
avoid Canadian taxes. Case dismissed from U.S. court
is pending in Canadian court. Case Judge Had Industry Ties.
United Technologies
Pratt & Whitney v. Chromalloy: (D. Delaware, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals)
Represented United Technologies
Pratt & Whitney in a patent infringement
breach of contract action filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Case won in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Super Helechos, et al. v. DuPont: (Miami-Dade County, Florida)
Represented DuPont in 10-week Miami jury trial of product liability claims involving Benlate fungicide. Plaintiffs, 27 Costa Rican farms, claimed $396 million damages. Trial court entered directed verdicts for DuPont on all claims of most of the largest plaintiffs (constituting 60% of plaintiffs' total claimed damages). Jury awarded other plaintiffs a small fraction of amounts sought. Florida court of appeals (1) affirmed directed verdicts for DuPont on claims of the largest plaintiffs,
(2) reversed all jury verdicts for other plaintiffs due to numerous trial court errors. Court tosses out DuPont judgment .
Chromalloy v. United Technologies Corporation
Pratt & Whitney: (Bexar County, Texas)
Represented United Technologies
Pratt & Whitney in an antitrust action filed in the District Court of Bexar County, Texas. Case won after four-month jury trial. Case recognized by National Law Journal asHonorable Mention Defense Victories in 1996.
Confidential Breach of Contract Arbitration: (San Jose, CA)
Represented former owners of software company in breach of contract action against the purchaser of the company. Case settled on favorable terms shortly before trial.
Confidential Pharmaceutical Mediation: Opposing party claimed substantial damages stemming from alleged antitrust violations, breach of contract, tortious interference,
fraud involving the alleged monopolization of the active ingredient used to manufacture client's medicine. Case settled on favorable terms involving a supply agreement providing present
future payments to our client of at least $30 million.
***: GTE Corp. v. Allendale Mutual Insurance Co., et al.: (District of New Jersey)
Represented GTE in suit to recover sue
labor expenses under its insurance contracts stemming from Y2K remediation efforts. Case dismissed on summary judgment.
In re Jolley: (Federal Circuit Court of Appeals)
Represented The Lubrizol Corporation in its appeal from an adverse ruling in a patent interference action filed before the Patent & Trademark Office. Case affirmed.
Panaras v. Liquid Carbonic
CBI: (Northern District of Illinois
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Represented Liquid Carbonic Industries
CBI Industries in an ERISA
breach of contract action. Case dismissed. Argued appeal. District court decision affirmed on appeal.
Locke v. Farley
Fruit of the Loom: (Northern District of Illinois)
Represented William Farley
Fruit of the Loom's other officers
directors in securities fraud class action. Case settled on favorable terms after completion of discovery.
Tabankin v. Kemper Financial Services: (Northern District of Illinois)
Represented Kemper in a securities fraud class action. Case dismissed. Appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Case settled on favorable terms while appeal pending.
Mailers Data, et al. v. NCR, et al.: (Pinellas County, Florida)
Represented NCR in antitrust class action. Case settled on favorable terms just prior to class certification hearing.
Johnson Products v. Guardsmark: (Northern District of Illinois)
Represented Johnson Products in a breach of contract
fraud action. Case settled on favorable terms.
Panaras v. Liquid Carbonic
CBI: (Northern District of Illinois
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Represented Liquid Carbonic Industries
CBI Industries in an age discrimination action. Case dismissed. District court decision affirmed on appeal.
India Breweries, Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co.: (Eastern District of Wisconsin)
Represented India Breweries in a breach of contract action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The case concerned breach of a license agreement for the sale of Miller beer in India. Case pending.
Johnson Products v. Pro-Line: (Northern District of Illinois)
Represented Johnson Products in a patent infringement action. Case settled on favorable terms, after obtaining favorable Markman ruling.
CityScope v. LaSalle Bank: (Cook County, Illinois)
Represent CityScope in action based on promissory estoppel, breach of fiduciary duty,
violation of the Consumer Fraud
Protection Act, stemming from LaSalle's conduct concerning CityScope's desire to seek a loan to finance the making of a movie.
Market Makers v Jeneric: (Wayne County, Michigan)
Advised Jeneric in an equitable redemption
tortious interference action. Case settled on favorable terms.
Chicago Milwaukee v. United States: (U.S. Court of Federal Claims
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals)
Represented Chicago Milwaukee Corporation in a tax refund action. Appeal won, case rem
ed
settled on favorable terms.
People v. Luckett: (Cook County, Illinois)
Represented Darryl Luckett in a first degree murder suit. Client pleaded guilty on favorable terms.
Reed v. Farley: (United States Supreme Court)
Represented Orrin Reed in a habeas corpus suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Case dismissed
affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Case briefed
argued in the United States Supreme Court, which affirmed the dismissal.
Chicago: Council of Lawyers v. Supreme Court of Illinois: (Illinois Supreme Court)
Represented the Chicago Council of Lawyers
other bar associations in a petition for reconsideration of the Illinois Supreme Court's administrative ruling limiting the number
length of appellate court opinions. Petition denied.
