Month: April 2022

Plessman and Chou Repeat as “Women of Influence”

Ms. Plessman has established herself as a top litigator, representing clients in high stakes matters, including securities fraud, copyright infringement, wildfire litigation, trade secret theft, breach of contract and professional negligence matters, and white collar defense. Ms. Plessman consistently delivers successful outcomes for high-profile clients faced with complex, challenging business, regulatory, and criminal matters. Her recent victories for SweeGen and Broadcom has garnered her repeated recognition by the Daily Journal as one of the “Top Women Lawyers in California.” She has also been included on Los Angeles Business Journal’s “Women of Influence: Attorneys” list for the third consecutive year.

“A recognized rising star” and one of the “brightest litigators across the US,” Ms. Chou is a partner and a key member of the White Collar and Investigations team. She is a seasoned trial and appellate attorney and served as a Deputy Chief in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Central District of California. Since joining Hueston Hennigan, Ms. Chou has been involved with developing strategies related to many of the firm’s complex and high-profile cases. She has been recognized as a rising star by multiple publications: Top White Collar Attorneys by the Daily Journal, 40 & Under Hot List by Benchmark Litigation, Women of Influence and Minority Leaders of Influence lists by the Los Angeles Business Journal, and one of only 20 recipients of National Asian Pacific American Bar Association’s (NAPABA) 2020 Best Under 40, a significant accomplishment as the field includes those in all areas of the law, including the judiciary, academia, and politics.

The Los Angeles Business Journal’s “Women of Influence: Attorneys” list recognizes women for their “exceptional legal skill and achievement across the full spectrum of responsibility, exemplary leadership as evidenced by the highest professional and ethical standards, and for contributions to the Los Angeles community at large.”

Click here to view full profile.

Dixon and Rayburn Named Top IP Lawyers

The Daily Journal noted Mr. Dixon’s two trial wins in 2021 – securing a $25 million trial victory in the Eastern District of Texas on behalf of the patentee-plaintiff, Acorn Technologies, against Samsung involving utility patents relating to semiconductor technology, and securing a complete defense verdict of no infringement and invalidity representing ClearOne Inc. against Shure Incorporated in a design patent case in the District of Delaware—an extremely rare invalidity result in a design patent case.

“Trials are about organizing facts around a memorable story,” Dixon explained. “Asking the inventor to describe the process that led to that ‘eureka’ moment when he or she discovered something novel, something new, helps humanize and dramatize what can often be complex technology in a very memorable way.”

Rayburn—who participated in both the Acorn and ClearOne trials—credits “a lifelong ability to translate issues that people might not understand into plain English, to explain things in simple terms” and a mechanical engineering degree from Stanford University as assets in representing clients in intellectual property litigation.

Daily Journal editors noted the multi-district battle between ClearOne and Shure, describing it as a “David and Goliath story.” In a related case in the Northern District of Illinois, Rayburn was able to show, before trial, that Shure likely infringed a ClearOne patent, thus obtaining a preliminary injunction, something rare in patent litigation. ClearOne then obtained a contempt finding against Shure for Shure’s violation of that preliminary injunction and had that contempt finding upheld on appeal before the Federal Circuit.

The list recognizes the very best intellectual property attorneys in California who have made an impact on the law and society within the last year.

Doug Dixon profile

Christy Von der Ahe Rayburn profile

Rayburn and Haines Author Article on Willful Patent Infringements

Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, a court “may increase” a damages award on a finding of patent infringement “up to three times the amount found or assessed.” The standard for imposing enhanced damages under this section has emerged from case law over the years and historically relates to whether the infringement was found to be willful. In 2016, the Supreme Court dramatically altered the standard for awarding enhanced damages. Since then, district courts across the country have struggled with the pleading standards related to requests for enhanced damages. This past March, Judge William H. Alsup of the Northern District of California lamented the lack of appellate authority in this area. See Sonos, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. C 21-07559 WHA, 2022 WL 799367, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2022). Patent plaintiffs and defendants should heed how allegations of willful infringement and requests for enhanced damages are treated across jurisdictions.

To read the full article, click here. (Subscription required).

Three-Time “California Trial Firm of the Year” Hueston Hennigan Cited as “Gold Star Litigation Boutique” with “Yearly Streak of High-Profile Trial Wins”

At the awards ceremony, Benchmark Litigation Managing Editor, Michael Rafalowich described Hueston Hennigan as a “a gold star litigation boutique … that has become a unanimously championed LA powerhouse.” He added, “the California Trial Firm of the year is a crackerjack litigation boutique with a yearly streak of high-profile trial wins.”

For the third consecutive year: California Trial Firm of the Year
For the fourth consecutive year: Los Angeles Firm of the Year
Impact Case of the Year: eBay v. Amazon.com

John Hueston was also honored with the following awards:

Hall of Fame
California Trial Lawyer of the Year (second consecutive year)
Los Angeles Litigator of the Year (third consecutive year)

The Benchmark Litigation awards recognizes “the country’s most distinguished litigators and their firms for their exemplary work over the past twelve months. After months of peer review-based research and submission reviews, the Benchmark team set out to uncover the most impactful cases, the lawyers and law firms behind them, and the litigators who have paved the way.”

 

Hueston Hennigan Wins $175M, Fees & Royalty, One of the Largest-Ever U.S. Trademark Awards

The decision “recognizes that Bang has long competed unfairly in the beverage marketplace,” noted co-lead counsel John Hueston to Reuters.

In awarding nearly $185 million and a 5% royalty on future sales to Monster and Orange Bang, the arbitrator noted that VPX’s conduct was intentional: “there was plenty of convincing evidence of VPX’s cavalier attitude about adhering” to the terms of the agreement. The arbitrator further noted that Mr. Owoc demonstrated a “cavalier indifference” to his contractual obligations.

“The arbitrator found overwhelming evidence that Bang violated both the contract and trademark law. This is an important and significant victory,” explained co-lead counsel Moez Kaba to Law360.

The significance of the 5% royalty on future sales awarded by the arbitrator is underscored by a recent social media post by Mr. Owoc claiming that VPX’s sales grew to $1.57 billion in 2021. If VPX fails to pay the royalty, it can only market and sell Bang products in vitamin and dietary supplement sections, and it cannot use the Bang mark at all within 12 states, including California, Texas, and New York.

The Hueston Hennigan trial team was led by John Hueston and Moez Kaba, and includes Allison Libeu, Lauren McGrory Johnson, Sourabh Mishra, Brandon Marsh, Michael Todisco, Julia Haines, Justin Greer, Segun Babatunde, and Amber Munoz.

Media Coverage:
Reuters
Law360
Daily Journal (subscription required)