Email this page

X

Send this page to a friend:

Send to (Email): Sent By (Email):

Intellectual Property Litigation

Printer-friendly version

Practice Group Leader

Jodyann Galvin

Attorneys

Jessica L. Copeland

Robert J. Fluskey, Jr.

Stephen W. Kelkenberg

Robert J. Lane Jr.

Cynthia G. Ludwig

Daniel C. Oliverio

Paul I. Perlman

Melissa N. Subjeck

In a business climate driven by constant innovation and commodified information, protecting your intellectual property is critical to success — and survival. Clients ranging from emerging visionaries to market-leading corporations count on Hodgson Russ LLP to support and defend the ideas, designs, and processes that are the lifeblood of their business.

Attorneys in the Hodgson Russ Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group help clients protect their intellectual property rights by prosecuting and defending claims of infringement or misappropriation of patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and ideas. We provide informed counsel and staunch advocacy for our clients throughout the litigation process, from strategy development, pre-litigation investigations, and Markman hearings all the way through litigation, appeals, and associated proceedings.

Drawing upon the resources of our full-service law firm, we create multidisciplinary teams to ensure matters are handled effectively and efficiently. Our clients — spanning all traditional disciplines and today’s cutting-edge industries — get the quality representation they expect from the nation’s largest firms plus the value, personal attention, and access to top legal talent of a firm next door. We work closely with attorneys at our firm who have advanced degrees in engineering, chemistry, and the biological sciences, and other areas to bring to our representation a thorough understanding of our clients’ business, technology, and objectives.

We Know Your Industry

We represent clients in numerous industries, including:

• Biotechnology
• Chemical engineering and manufacturing
• Children’s products
• Entertainment and media
• Financial services
• Manufacturing
• Medical devices
• Nanotechnology
• Pharmaceuticals 
• Software
• Solar technology

Experience That Matters

Our clients benefit from our extensive experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in matters involving all forms of intellectual property, including:

• Representing clients in patent infringement matters involving a diverse range of products and services (including medical devices, pharmaceuticals, sports equipment, genetic testing, linguistic search engine technology, and nanoparticle coatings, to name just a few)
• Bringing and defending challenges to domain names (ICANN and federal court proceedings)
• Bringing and defending trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)
• Conducting jury and bench trials of patent, trademark, and misappropriation claims in state and federal courts
• Obtaining preliminary injunctions
• Working with patent prosecutors on re-examination proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Our attorneys are recognized authorities on IP litigation. In fact, businesses and other lawyers learn about critical legal developments and trial techniques from the many seminars and presentations conducted by members of our team.

Selected Cases

A small sample of significant cases and court decisions follows.

American Medical Rehabilitation Providers Association v. University at Buffalo Foundation Activities, Inc., Opposition No. 91158512 (TTAB 2008) (FIM and FIM SYSTEM are not generic and are therefore registrable)

First Niagara Insurance Brokers v. First Niagara Financial Group, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 19391 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (no relation between banking and insurance, and therefore no likelihood of confusion)

Nulux, Inc. v. Litelab Corporation et al., Civ. No. 1:01-cv-03023 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (no trade dress infringement with respect to high-end retail architectural lighting)

Design Innovation, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 463 F. Supp. 2d 177 (D. Conn. 2006) (disgorgement of defendant’s profits not available in misappropriation cases except as a reasonable proxy for plaintiff’s lost profits)

Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. v. Shaw Environmental, Inc., 2006 WL 4804741 (W.D.N.Y. 2006) (summary judgment dismissing patent infringement action against government contractor pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498)

First Niagara Insurance Brokers v. First Niagara Insurance Group, 2005 TTAB LEXIS 453 (TTAB 2005) (in commerce requirement under Lanham Act; one commentator named this one of the top ten trademark decisions of 2005)

In Re Plastics Research Corp. Litigation, 2002 WL 100450 (E.D. Mich. 2002) (summary judgment based on a finding of non-infringement of a design patent)

Microsoft Corp. v. Black Cat Computer Wholesale, 269 F. Supp. 2d 118 (W.D.N.Y. 2002) (injunction barring sales of counterfeit software)

Animazing Entertainment Inc. v. Louis Lofredo Associates, Inc., 88 F.Supp (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (judgment holding an individual may not enforce a contract entered into in the name of a dissolved corporation)

Augustine Medical, Inc. v. Gaymar Industries, 181 F.3d 1291 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (dismissal of patent infringement claim due to prosecution history estoppel)

BellSouth Corp. v. White Directory Publishers, 42 F. Supp. 2d 598 (M.D.N.C. 1999) (“walking fingers” symbol is in the public domain and is therefore not a trademark)

Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F.Supp. 1119 (E.D.Pa. 1997) (this is the most often-cited case throughout the United States on principles of internet-based personal jurisdiction)

Hydraflow v. Enidine Inc., 907 F. Supp. 639 (W.D.N.Y. 1995) (summary judgment on the basis that device did not infringe plaintiff’s patent as a structural equivalent)

The Hodgson Russ Advantage

Whether counseling on protection strategies in the conference room or defending our clients’ interests in the courtroom, the Hodgson Russ Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group provides sophisticated and cost-effective legal services focused on helping clients achieve their business objectives. Without the high price tag that generally comes with firms headquartered in larger cities, our attorneys have the breadth and depth of knowledge and experience necessary to help our clients protect their intellectual property rights and strengthen their competitiveness in today’s business world.