Ever since her first day of work at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 16 years ago, Karen Younkins’ work has covered nearly all aspects of intellectual property practice, including litigation, patent prosecution, licensing, and client counseling. She has extensive experience litigating intellectual property and other high-stakes technology disputes in state and federal courts as well as at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. At Hueston Hennigan, she works closely with business teams, in-house counsel, inventors, and technical experts to understand her clients’ technology, resolve intellectual property disputes, and reduce legal risks.
Prior to re-joining Hueston Hennigan in 2023, Ms. Younkins worked at RPX Corporation, a defensive patent licensing aggregator, where she counseled clients on intellectual property risk and developed market-based strategies for responding to patent disputes. She was also previously a patent litigation associate at Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
Ms. Younkins also has many years of patent prosecution experience, first as a patent examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and later in private practice and as in-house counsel at an electric automotive company.
During law school, Ms. Younkins was a global teaching fellow for a first-year course on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. She also studied abroad at the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization in Geneva, Switzerland.
As part of Ms. Younkins’ undergraduate studies in physics, astronomy and mathematics, she studied the fractal dimension of ferrofluids in a Hele-Shaw cell when subjected to a magnetic field. She also co-authored a book on topology.
Experience
Secured a complete victory for Amazon.com and Starbucks Corporation in novel class action litigation alleging the failure to warn customers that they were being monitored by “biometric technology” without providing notice. After Hueston Hennigan obtained a series of wins including a motion to dismiss that significantly narrowed the claims and subsequent merits discovery into the Just Walk Out and Amazon One technologies, the plaintiffs dismissed the entire case with prejudice. (See “Amazon and Starbucks Win Full Dismissal of Biometric Data Privacy Case in Washington Federal Court,” Law.com; “Amazon, Starbucks Win Motion to Dismiss Most Claims in Biometric Data Privacy Case,” Law.com; “Amazon, Starbucks face WA class-action lawsuit over customer data,” The Seattle Times; “NYC Starbucks, Amazon Patrons File Suit Over Biometric Scans,” Bloomberg Law).
Secured a favorable settlement for Amazon.com in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by KAIFI related to Alexa and other Amazon products.
Secured a favorable settlement for Jacuzzi against BCI Acrylic in an infringement case related to a patent for a textured grout wall design for bathtubs and showers.
Representing Inari Medical, Inc. in a plaintiff-side patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation dispute brought against a competitor.
Defending Amazon.com against multiple class action lawsuits alleging Amazon technologies violate biometric privacy laws.
Secured a favorable settlement for Amazon.com in a patent infringement lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas alleging over a billion in damages for use of Amazon Robotics’ technology in Amazon’s fulfillment centers.
Represented ClearOne Inc. in litigation against Shure Incorporated involving a design patent for beamforming microphone arrays through summary judgment motions. A jury handed ClearOne a complete defense verdict, finding the patent was not infringed and invalid. (See “Jury Says Microphone Co. Shure’s Patent Invalid After Trial,” Law360).
Won a motion for preliminary injunction for ClearOne Inc. in a patent infringement suit, enjoining a large, multinational competitor’s manufacture, marketing, and sale of a competing, infringing product.
Obtained a favorable settlement for a leading fitness technology company—including admissions of patent validity, intentional copying and an agreement to immediately cease using its patented leaderboard technology—after prevailing on an Alice challenge and virtually every other motion. (See “Peloton, Flywheel Settle Legal Disputes Over Fitness Bike Tech,” Wall Street Journal; “Peloton, Flywheel Agree To End Patent Fight Over Bike Tech,” Law360).
Represented Pfizer in 12 inter partes review proceedings and district court litigation related to monoclonal antibodies.
Represented Oracle in district court, inter partes review, and federal circuit proceedings related to graphical user interface software.