Victories
Latest Wins
| Firm | Our Wins |
|---|---|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
3 |
|
6 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
3 |
Garteiser Honea has successfully and consistently obtained great results for its clients against their adversaries, often much larger corporations represented by well known law firms, as indicated below.
Disclaimer — Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.
Decapolis Claim Construction Sweep against Athenahealth, eClinicalWorks, and Others
(March 22, 2022, Waco, TX) Preliminary Claim Construction went to the Plaintiff in five currently pending cases in the Western District of Texas.
Plaintiff Decapolis Systems, LLC is represented by Scott Fuller, René Vazquez, Chris Honea, and Randall Garteiser, from Garteiser Honea, PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique headquartered in Tyler, Texas.
Athenahealth, Inc. is represented by Andrew Pearson, Christopher R. Dillon, Philip K. Chen, and David M. Hoffman from Fish & Richardson P.C.
eClinicalWorks, LLC is represented by Doug Nemec and Edward Tulin of Skadden, as well as Timothy Cleveland and Austin Krist from Cleveland Krist.
Medical Software Solutions had Kasey Ratliff, LaCrecia Perkins and Michael D. Karson from Winstead PC, joined by Gregory Arbogast and Robert Nanovsky of Gebhardt & Smith.
Universal Software Solutions brought in John Shumaker from Connor Lee & Shumaker PLLC of Austin.
Garteiser Honea wins against Winston & Strawn
(March 8, 2022, Marshall, TX) Judge Roy S. Payne gave a claim construction win to Plaintiff Transcend Shipping Systems, LLC in their case against Zim Integrated Shipping Services, Ltd., Case 2:21-cv-00108-JRG-RSP. See the full order here.
Zim Integrated Shipping Services was represented by Rex Mann, Ahtoosa Dale, and Richard Thaddeus McCarty of Winston & Strawn.
Plaintiff Transcend Shipping Services was represented by René Vazquez, accompanied by Chris Honea, Randall Garteiser, and Scott Fuller from Garteiser Honea, PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique headquartered in Tyler, Texas.
PNC Bank’s Fish & Richardson loses Motion to Dismiss against Mirror Imaging & GH
(January 26, 2022, Waco, TX) Judge Albright today denied a Motion to Dismiss filed by PNC Bank in Mirror Imaging, LLC v. PNC Bank, N.A., Case 6:21-cv-00518-ADA.
The Motion was a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss based on patent ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and collateral estoppel. In other words, defendants said the case should be dismissed becuse the patents shouldn’t have been granted in the first place because their inventions are unpatentable. Those inventions describe a “Remote Document Retrieval and Storage System.” See the full order here.
PNC Bank’s Motion was written and defended by David B. Conrad, Neil J. McNabnay, Michael A. Vincent, and Ricardo J. Bonilla from Fish & Richardson’s Dallas office.
Plaintiff Mirror Imaging was represented here by Scott Fuller and the team at Garteiser Honea, PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique headquartered in Tyler, Texas. Appearing with Fuller are Randall Garteiser and René Vazquez.
Judge Sees through Defendants’ Discovery Shenanigans in Cellspin cases
(December 8, 2021, San Francisco) Today, Garteiser Honea nabbed another win against Defendants on behalf of their client Cellspin Soft, Inc. Defendants had previously asked for specific documents that came up during a deposition, which requested documents, to avoid motion practice, Cellspin provided. But after reviewing these documents, Defendants, led by the law firm of Desmarais LLP, attempted to use the pretext of an unrelated Court Order to preclude Cellspin from using the very documents Defendants demanded Cellspin produce. The Northern California Court saw through these shenanigans. In denying the Defendants’ Motion, she expressly “DENIED” all three separate “reliefs” requested in capital letters: “DENIED.” See the full order here.
Cellspin has been represented in these cases by the boutique IP trial law firm of Garteiser Honea. With decades of experience handling IP matters, Garteiser Honea’s team is not deterred from going the distance in patent litigation. To the contrary, they plan for it from the beginning of every case. This is very different from the trendy landscape of scorched earth firms. The Cellspin cases have been taking longer than most in order to assure proper results on the merits against these defendants who have not missed an opportunity to file motion after motion, but Cellspin’s counsel remains confident Cellspin will get its day in Court.
Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc. is here represented by Randall Garteiser, Christopher Honea, Scott Fuller, René Vazquez, and Peter Corcoran.
Defendants are represented as follows:
-
Fitbit Inc., itself a part of Google, was primarily represented by Karim Z. Oussayef of Desmarais LLP’s New York office and John M. Desmarais of Desmarais LLP’s San Francisco office. Also from Desmarais San Francisco is Ameet Modi; and Jamie Kringstein, Alan Kelvin, Jon Lewis from Desmarais NY; and Tuhin Ganguly from Desmarais DC. Shane Brun joined from King & Spalding. Neel Chatterchee, Rachel Walsh and Anjali Moorthy participated from Goodwin Procter LLP.
-
Fossil Group and Misfit were represented by Noel Chakkalakal, Rodeen Talebi, Ricardo Bonilla, David Conrad, Neil McNabnay, Dalia Kothari, and Theresa Marie Dawson from Fish & Richardson PC., joined by Ameet Modi, David Frey, Jamie Kringstein, Karim Oussayef and John Desmarais from Desmarais LLP.
-
Moov, Inc. was represented by King & Spalding’s Shane Brun.
-
Nike chose DLA Piper’s Richard Mulloy, Edward Sikorski, and Peter Maggiore to represent them.
-
Under Armour, Inc. was represented by Harkness, Dickey and Pierce’s Michael Kella, George Moustakas, Mochael Doerr, and Scott Barnett; joined by Vinay Vijay Joshi of Turocy & Watson LLP.
-
Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin USA, Inc. are represented in this case by Rachael Lamkin of Lamkin IP Defense.
-
Nikon Americas, Inc. and Nikon Inc. were represented by Morrison & Foerster LLP’s Yuka Teraguchi, assisted by Jack Londen, Jenny Liu, and Stephen Liu.
Garteiser Honea wins Motion to Enforce Settlement
(August 23, 2021, Waco, TX) Judge Albright today denied Renesas Electronics’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement in Teleputers, LLC vs. Renesas Electronics America Inc. and Renesas Electronics Corporation, Case 6:20-cv-00599-ADA.
Judge Albright wrote:
The parties agreed to a principal amount to settle the underlying litigation and then jointly moved the Court for a stay on or about October 7, 2020. See Dkt. No. 14. Counsel for Teleputers made it clear at the outset of the parties’ negotiations in an email that the prospective settlement agreement would not include a broad license to all of Teleputers’ current and future patents. …the only term the parties have ever agreed upon is the amount of the settlement payment. Teleputers never agreed to a broad license and this fact is evidenced in the record.
Renesas’s motion was written and defended by Jason Crotty of San Francisco’s Mauriel Kapouytian Woods and Steven Chase Callahan of Dallas’ Charhon Callahan Robson & Garza.
Plaintiff Teleputers LLC was represented by Thomas Fasone, Randall Garteiser, and Scott Fuller of Garteiser Honea, PLLC (Tyler), along with Ray Mort of the Mort Law Firm (Austin).
Appeals Court Quickly Denies Freelancer ‘Emergency’ Motion to Stay
(June 16, 2021 – Washington DC) This morning a three-judge appellate panel at The Court of Federal Claims this morning denied Freelancer Limited’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus in 21-151-LM, titled In re: Freelancer Limited, as well as denying the underlying Motion to Stay pending resolution of the Motion to Dismiss GreatGigz Solutions, LLC v. Freelancer Limited, 6:20-cv-00738-ADA, currently pending in The Western District of Texas with Judge Alan Albright.
The full order can be found here.
Freelancer had petitioned for a writ directing Judge Albright to stay the case in his court until he ruled on their Motion to Dismiss. They also petitioned for a writ from the appeals court for a stay pending a ruling on their request for the first writ. This case was filed in August 2020 by GreatGigz Solutions, LLC regarding the alleged infringement of two patents. Freelancer had filed its Motion to Dismiss, GreatGigz its Response in Opposition, and in March 2021 Freelancer filed its Reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss. On March 26, 2021 Freelancer Moved to Stay proceedings pending the district court’s resolution of Freelancer’s motion to dismiss the complaint. By April 21, they had filed their reply for their Motion to Stay.
Rather than waiting for the Judge to rule, on June 10 Freelancer filed its petition with the Appeals court, asking for an Emergency Stay. On June 16, the Appeals court ruled that this was no emergency, that “Mandamus is reserved for extraordinary situations.” The Court further stated that “Freelancer has identified no authority establishing a clear legal right to a stay of all proceedings premised solely on the filing of a motion to dismiss the complaint. Nor are we prepared to say, at this juncture, that any delay in failing to resolve either of Freelancer’s pending motions to dismiss and stay proceedings is so unreasonable or egregious as to warrant mandamus relief.”
They then ordered the Petition denied and the Motion to Stay denied.
GreatGigz Solutions, LLC was represented by Scott Fuller, Randall Garteiser, Christopher Honea, René Vazquez, and the team at Garteiser Honea.
Freelancer Limited was represented by Andrew T. Oliver and Michael C. Ting of Amin, Turocy & Watson LLP.
Nike, Fitbit/Google, Under Armour Fail against Inventor Cellspin Soft
(April 14, 2021 – Oakland, CA) Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the Northern District of California has denied a concerted attempt to invalidate an inventor’s patents by a force comprised of Fitbit, Inc., Moov, Inc., Nike, Inc., Under Armour, Inc., Fossil Group, Inc., Misfit Inc., Garmin International, Inc., Garmin USA Inc., Nikon Inc., and Nikon Americas, Inc.
According to Bloomberg Law, Cellspin Soft, Inc., with a team led by Garteiser Honea’s Scott Fuller and Randall Garteiser, overcame the § 101 arguments that Cellspin’s “Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content” patents, which describe concepts and inventions integral to the development of modern Bluetooth technologies we each use every day, lacked an inventive concept. Cellspin had submitted fifty inventive concepts to the Court, who agreed that these crucial technologies may not have existed without Cellspin, and therefore summary judgment was not appropriate and the case should proceed to a full trial before a jury.
The Order Denying Defedant’s Motion for Summary Judgment can be found here. The case was similarly covered in Law360.
Cellspin Soft was represented by Scott Fuller, Randall Garteiser, Christopher Honea, and the team at Garteiser Honea.
Fitbit was represented by Karim Oussayef, Jamie Kringstein, Ameet Modi, and John Desmarais of Desmarais LLP; and Shane Brun of King & Spalding LLP.
Nike was represented by Richard Mulloy, Ed Sikorski, and Peter Maggiore of DLA Piper.
Moov was represented by Shane Brun of King & Spalding.
Under Armour was represented by George Moustakas, Michael Patrick Kella, and Scott Douglas Barnett of Harness Dickey; and Vinay Joshi of Turocy & Watson LLP.
Fossil was represented by David Conrad, Dalia Kothari, Neil J McNabnay, Noel Franco Chakkalakal, Ricardo J. Bonilla, Rodeen Talebi, Theresa Dawson of Fish and Richardson; and Ameet A. Modi, David Frey, Jamie Kringstein, John Desmarais, and Karim Oussayef of Desmarais LLP.
Garmin was represented by Rachael Lamkin of Lamkin IP Defense.
Nikon was represented by Jack Londen, Colette Mayer, Jianing Liu, Stephen J. H. Liu, and Yuka Teraguchi of Morrison & Foerster LLP; and Jacob Schroeder and Houtan Esfahani of Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
Apple, Inc.
lost its Motion to Stay in NavBlazer, LLC v. Apple, Inc, Case Case 6:20-cv-00085-ADA, on July 29, 2020. Apple wanted to stay the case pending resolution of its earlier Motion to Transfer to the Northern District of California. The Judge was unconvinced and responded quickly, denying the motion. Apple was represented here by Alan Littmann, Doug Winnard, Michael Pieja, and Samuel E. Schoenburg of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP, supported by J. Stephen Ravel of Kelly Hart & Hallman. NavBlazer was represented by Garteiser Honea’s Randall Garteiser, Chris Honea, Scott Fuller, Tom Fasone, René Vazquez, along with Ray Mort from The Mort Law Firm.
Dell loses Motion to Dismiss for Res Judicata
(March 25, 2019 – Tyler, Texas) Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle denied Dell’s Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for Res Judicata in TXED 6:18-cv-0138, consolidated into 6:18-cv-0030, Dkt 158.
Res Judicata (literally, ‘a thing judged’) is an argument that the question at hand has already been decided previously. In this case, Dell was asserting that Cypress Lake Software’s previous and successful lawsuit against Dell over certain products running Windows 10 precluded it from now filing a similar case accusing Dell’s Chromebook offerings or Windows 7 products. After 10 months of motion practice and a hearing, the judge agreed with Garteiser Honea and Cypress Lake Software, denying Dell’s Motion.
Representing Dell was Roger Fulghum of Baker Botts Houston, along with Natalie Alfaro Gonzales, Tammy Pennington and Ali Dhanani, all out of Baker Botts’ Houston office; and Paula Heyman from Baker Botts in Austin. Also for Dell were Krista Sue Schwartz from Jones Day San Francisco, Sasha Mayergoyz of Jones Day Chicago, Sanjiv Laud from Jones Day Minneapolis, and David Anderson from Jones Day Cleveland. Glenn Thames, Patrick Clutter, and Mike Jones from Potter Minton in Tyler also represented Dell. At the hearing, voice for Dell was Deron Dacus of The Dacus Firm in Tyler. Also in attendance was Senior Litigation Counsel from Dell and four attorneys representing Samsung.
Successfully arguing for Cypress Lake Software were Randall Garteiser and Christopher Honea of Garteiser Honea, along with Scott Fuller.
Garteiser Honea wins one more as Judge Denies Motion to Transfer HP
(June 27, 2018 – Tyler, Texas) Today, Garteiser Honea won a key victory for its client against HP, Inc., represented by Jones Day in an attempt to move venue to the N.D. Cal in TXED 6:17-cv-0462 Dkt. 30, consolidated as 6:17-cv-0300-RWS, Dkt. 91. Hewlett-Packard had a sufficient presence in the Eastern District of Texas such that the court ruled it was “clearly not more convenient to move the case to the Northern District of California.” In his ruling, Judge Schroeder did not put any weight on the related cases following HP’s lawsuit. However, this was due to the analysis being done at the time of the filing of the original HP lawsuit. So should Samsung or Dell attempt to change venue, the result may be same but the rationale for the ruling could change based on Rule 1 parameters that the parties, as well as the courts, must take into consideration.
Attorneys representing HP, Inc. were led by Krista Sue Schwartz out of Jones Day Chicago, accompanied by Israel Sasha Mayergoyz (Chicago), Michael A. Lavine (San Francisco), and Sanjiv Prakash Laud (Minneapolis). Also representing HP were Brandon Hugh Stroy & Sasha G. Rao from Maynard Cooper & Gale LLP of San Francisco and Michael E Jones of Potter Minton of Tyler.
Audible Magic’s Motion to Strike Infringement Contentions Denied
(January 12, 2015 – Tyler, Texas) Judge Caroline Craven denied Defendant Audible Magic’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC’s preliminary infringement contentions. Blue Spike, LLC v. Texas Instruments, et al., 6:12-cv-499-MHS-CMC, Dkt. No. 1898. Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC served preliminary contentions in February of 2014 and upon request of Defendant Audible Magic, amended those infringement contentions to respond to alleged deficiencies. Defendant Audible Magic filed a motion to strike the original infringement contentions shortly thereafter. After engaging in discovery, Defendant Audible Magic yet again requested that Plaintiff supplement its infringement contentions with additional information gathered through discovery. In denying Defendant’s motion, the Court noted that while more specificity “may” be appropriate as additional information comes to light, “[n]otice is the core function” of the infringement contentions; “this notice…’need not meet the level of detail required, for example, on a motion for summary judgment.’” Id. at 3. Judge Craven ruled that Blue Spike, LLC provided adequate notice of its infringement theories to Audible Magic and denied Defendants motion.
Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC is represented by Randall Garteiser, Christopher Honea, Kirk Anderson, Ian Ramage, Molly Jones, and Peter Brasher of Garteiser Honea PLLC.
Defendant Audible Magic Corp. is represented by I. Neel Chatterjee, Gabriel Ramsey, Alyssa Caridis, and Christopher Higgins of Orrick, Herrington, and Sutcliffe and Eric Findlay, Brian Craft, and Walter Lackey of Findlay Craft PC of Tyler, Texas.
Audible Magic
was denied its opposition to Blue Spike’s Motion to Extend Deadline to Respond by Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-MHS, Dkt 1736, on September 4, 2014. Garteiser Honea PLLC represents Blue Spike. Audible Magic is represented by Alyssa Caridis, Christopher J. Higgins, Gabriel M. Ramsey, I. and Neel Chatterjee of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe; Eric Hugh Findlay and Walter Wayne Lackey of Findlay Craft; James V. Fazio, III of San Diego IP Law; and Daniel Johnson, Jr. of Morgan Lewis.
Cognitec Systems Corp
and Cognitec Systems GmbH, with counsel Dwayne Goetzel, Ryan Beard, and Willem Schuurman of Meyertons, Hood, Kivlin, Kowert, & Goetzel, P.C., were denied their Motion to Dismiss Claims of Infringement in Blue Spike LLC v. Texas Instruments, Case No. 6:12-cv-499-MHS-CMC, Dkt. 1645, on July 22, 2014. Blue Spike was represented by Garteiser Honea.
Clear Channel
represented by O’Melveny and Myers LLP against Blue Spike LLC’s Garteiser Honea, was denied in its Motion to Transfer Venue to the Southern District of New York in Blue Spike LLC v. Texas Instruments, Case No. 6:12-cv-499-MHS-CMC, Dkt. 1623, on July 2, 2014. Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven wrote “On balance, the Court does not find Clear Channel has established that the Southern District of New York is a clearly more convenient forum.”
The US Government
was denied its Motion to Reduce Asserted Claims from 80 to 32 in Blue Spike LLC v. The United States, Case No. 1:13-cv-419-EJD, Dkt. 40, (CFC Apr 07, 2014). Judge Edward J. Damich wrote “The Court agrees with Blue Spike’s argument that it could be prejudiced by limiting its asserted claims without a complete picture of the facts,” defined as before “claim-construction discovery is complete.” Blue Spike is represented by Garteiser Honea.
Cognitec Systems GmbH
represented by Meyertons Hood, lost to Garteiser Honea, representing Blue Spike LLC, in a Rule CV-26(e) “hotline” hearing before Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne as to whether Cognitec was justified in producing certain documents in redacted form during jurisdictional discovery. The Court heard argument from the parties and ordered that unredacted versions of the documents be produced by the end of the day, exactly as requested by Garteiser Honea. Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-MHS, Dkt. 1382, (E.D. Tex. March 27, 2014).
Last.fm
has lost its Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and venue against Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED, Dkt. 1385 (E.D. Tex Mar 31, 2014). Last.fm was represented by Weil Gotshal & Manges of Redwood City.
Audible Magic
was denied its Motion to Transfer to the Northern District of California in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED, Dkt. 1369 (E.D. Tex Mar 18, 2014). Blue Spike is represented by Garteiser Honea.
MorphoTrak / Safran
lost its Motion to Transfer, having “failed to satisfy their burden of showing this suit could have been originally filed in the Central District of California,” in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED, Dkt. 1352 (E.D. Tex Mar 14, 2014). Blue Spike LLC is represented by Garteiser Honea.
L-1 Identity Solutions / MorphoTrust
lost its Motion to Transfer “for the convenience of the parties” to New Jersey in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED, Dkt. 1353 (E.D. Tex Mar 14, 2014). Blue Spike LLC is represented by Garteiser Honea.
Cognitec Systems Corporation
lost its Motion to Dismiss, The Honorable Michael H. Schneider ruled in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-MHS (E.D. Tex. March 6, 2014). Garteiser Honea PLLC represents Blue Spike. The order immediately followed the denial of Cognitec Systems GmbH’s Motion to Dismiss in the same case. Meyertons, Hood, Kivlin, Kowert & Goetzel, P.C. filed both motions denied by the Court.
Tygart Technologies
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jan 16, 2014). Tygart Technologies was represented by Spilman, Thomas & Battle, PLLC and Potter Minton, P.C.
Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI)
along with Landmark Digital Services LLC, have agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jan 21, 2014). BMI and Landmark were represented by Fulbright & Jaworski LLP.
The US Government
was denied in their Motion to Stay by Judge Edward J. Damich in the case Blue Spike LLC v. The United States, Case No. 1:13-cv-419-EJD (CFC Nov 16, 2013). Blue Spike was represented by Garteiser Honea PLLC.
DigitalPersona
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Oct 22, 2013). DigitalPersona was represented by Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP and Potter Minton, P.C.
Free Stream Media
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Oct 22, 2013). Free Stream Media was represented by Friedman, Suder & Cooke.
Rovi
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jun 19, 2013). Rovi was represented by Farella Braun + Martel LLP.
Enswers
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jun 18, 2013). Enswers was represented by Rice & Saito LLP, Durie Tangri, and Potter Minton, P.C.
Suprema
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jun 18, 2013). Suprema was represented by Baker & McKenzie LLP.
Cognitive Networks
formerly TV Interactive Systems, has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex May 29, 2013). Cognitive Networks was represented by Perkins Coie LLP.
BioLink Solutions
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Apr 5, 2013).
Daon
has agreed to a resolution with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Mar 6, 2013). Daon was represented by Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing, P.C.
Yahoo!
has agreed to a resolution with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Feb 28, 2013). Tygart Technologies was represented by Kasowitz, Benson, Torres, & Friedman LLP and Findlay Craft LLP.
NEC
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Feb 28, 2013). NEC was represented by Ireland, Carrol & Kelley, P.C.
Integrated Biometrics
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jan 31, 2013).
BIO-key International
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Jan 5, 2013). BIO-key was represented by Choate, Hall & Stewart LLP and Findlay Craft LLP.
Cross Match Technologies
has agreed to a settlement and licensing agreement with Blue Spike LLC, represented by Garteiser Honea, in Blue Spike LLC v Texas Instruments, et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00499-LED (E.D. Tex Nov 9, 2012). Cross Match was represented by Latham & Watkins LLP and Potter Minton, P.C.
Exygy
Represented by Garteiser Honea, tech company Exygy LLC, won its two-day arbitration involving a breach of contract where the other side was represented by Perkins Coie in American Arbitration Association Case No. 74 117 E 362 12 NOLG (Palo Alto, CA, Nov. 3, 2012).
Harley-Davidson
has settled a copyright infringement lawsuit to the satisfaction of Garteiser Honea’s client, free-lance artist Wayne Peterson, known for his popular “Live to Ride” logos. The Harley-Davidson Motor Company was represented by Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP and Bryan Cave LLP in Peterson v. Harley-Davidson Inc., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-00381 (E.D. WI Oct. 21, 2012).
ConvaTec, Inc.
Settled a patent dispute related to medical equipment technology against ConvaTec, Inc., who was represented by Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione.
Energizer
has entered into a settlement agreement with Garteiser Honea’s client (2011). Energizer was represented by Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione.
C.R. Bard, Inc.
has settled in a patent dispute case against a Garteiser Honea client. C.R. Bard was was represented by Capshaw DeRieux LLP.
Koregon Enterprises, Inc.
has entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client. Koregon Enterprises, Inc. was represented by Chernoff Vilhauer, LLP.
DenTek Oral Care, Inc.
has entered into a patent dispute settlement concerning a endodontic device with a Garteiser Honea client. DenTek Oral Care, Inc. was represented by Proskauer Rose LLP.
Hollister Inc.
has settled a patent dispute case with a Garteiser Honea client. Hollister was represented by Patton, Tidwell & Schroeder, LLP.
Connoisseurs Products Corporation
has entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client. Connoisseurs Products Corporation was represented by Nelson, Kinder + Mosseau, PC.
Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. and Pactiv Corporation
have entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client. Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc., and Pactiv Corporation were both represented by Kaye Scholer LLP.
Fisher & Paykel Appliances, Inc.
have entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client relating to a washing machine technology. Fisher & Paykel Appliances, Inc. was represented by Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP.
Playboy Enterprises
has entered into a settlement agreement in a wrongful termination case with a Garteiser Honea client. Playboy was represented by Morgan Lewis.
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
has entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client relating to medical equipment technology. Smith & Nephew , Inc. was represented by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP.
Harley-Davidson
has been denied in its Motion to Dismiss the claims of copyright holder Wayne Peterson, the creator of the well-known “Live to Ride” logo and a Garteiser Honea client. Motorcycle giant Harley-Davidson Motor Company was represented by Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP and Bryan Cave LLP. See Peterson v. Harley-Davidson Inc., et al, Case No. 2:12-cv-00381, Dkt. No. 16 (E.D. WI July 31, 2012).
DE Technologies Inc.
has settled in a patent infringement lawsuit to the satisfaction of Garteiser Honea’s client iShopUSA Services, Inc. in DE Technologies, Inc. v. iShopUSA Services, Inc. and International Checkout, Inc., Case No. 7:11-cv-00183-GEC (W.D. VA July 10, 2012).
Fox Technologies
resolved a contract dispute to the satisfaction of Garteiser Honea’s tech client Aptus GRC LLC in Fox Technologies v. Aptus GRC LLC, Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, Case No. 111CIV212703 (Jun. 13, 2012).
AOL
has entered into a settlement agreement relating to cryptography technology with Garteiser Honea’s client and inventor, Martin E. Hellman, Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering at Stanford. AOL was represented by Jenner & Block (March 23, 2012).
Fletcher Carson
was denied a victory on demurrer against a Garteiser Honea client, who was wrongly accused of stealing trade secrets. The Court granted Garteiser Honea’s requested relief that did not not allow Plaintiff leave to even amend his complaint. Carson v. Raff (software), Case No. CIV1106045, California Superior Court, County of Marin, February 24, 2012.
Bally Gaming, Inc.
has entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client relating to gaming machine technologies. Bally Gaming was represented by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP.
The Quaker Oats Company
entered into a settlement agreement with a Garteiser Honea client. The Quaker Oats Company was represented by Baker Botts LLP (2011).
Security Equipment Corporation
has settled a patent dispute relating to pepper spray to the benefit of a Garteiser Honea client. Security Equipment Corporation was represented by Spencer Fane Britt & Browne LLP.
BRK Brands, Inc.
has settled a patent dispute case for a Garteiser Honea client. BRK Brands, Inc. was represented by K&L Gates LLP (2011).
Butler Creek Corporation and Bushnell Inc.
settled a patent dispute case for a Garteiser Honea client. Butler Creek and Bushnell were both represented by Wilson Trosclair & Lovins, PLLC.
The Armor All/STP Products Company
settled a patent dispute case for a Garteiser Honea client. The Armor All/STP Products Company was represented by Thompson & Knight LLP (2011).
Sloan Valve Company
settled a patent dispute case for a Garteiser Honea client. Sloan Valve Company was represented by Foley & Lardner LLP (2011).
Pentair, Inc.
settled a patent dispute relating to water filtration technology to the satisfaction of a Garteiser Honea client. Pentair was represented by Schiff Hardin LLC (2011).
CamelBak Products, LLC
settled a patent dispute case to the satisfaction of a Garteiser Honea client. CamelBak Products, LLC was represented by Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass LLP (2011).
Heatmax, Inc.
settled a patent dispute related to heating devices to the benefit of a Garteiser Honea client. Heatmax, Inc. was represented by Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, LLP (2011).
Who We Are
Garteiser Honea is a litigation boutique dedicated to winning high-stakes trials and appeals in courts across the country. We handle complex intellectual-property and business disputes as lead counsel. And given our experience and familiarity with federal and state courts in East Texas and Northern California, we often entertain requests to serve as local counsel here. Our attorneys come from top-ranked law schools and from prestigious judicial clerkships for federal trial or appeals...
