Richard Garriott v NCsoft (WDTX, Fish & Richardson) - Breach of Contract

Barnes & Roberts represented the plaintiff, Richard Garriott, in this breach of contract suit against his former employer NCsoft. When Garriott's employment with NCsoft ended in 2008, NCsoft claimed that Garriott resigned voluntarily, and gave him just 40 days to exercise the stock options he had earned when his company, Destination Games, was bought by NCsoft in 2001. Because of this decision, Garriott was forced to exercise his options during a period of depressed stock values. However, the jury agreed with Garriott that he had been fired, and that according to the terms of his contract, he should have had 2 1/2 years to exercise his options providing him with the ability benefit from a rebound in stock value. The jury found $28 million in damages to Garriott caused by NCsoft's breach of the employment agreement.

Red Hat and Novell v. IP Innovation and Technology Licensing Corp. (EDTX, Gibson Dunn) - Patent Infringement

Barnes & Roberts worked closely with Gibson Dunn lawyers from New York, Dallas and Silicon Valley from the technology tutorial, claim construction, discovery battles, summary judgement motions and through the trial process to develop and present an easily understandable - but technically accurate - case against the plaintiffs. The patents covered certain methods of creating and quickly switching between multiple desktops on a computer. So, showing actual systems at work was critical to our defense.

Not only did we help defendants Red Hat and Novell put on ample evidence of non-infringement, we also set up live demonstrations of two, 25-year-old computers: a Macintosh 512k and a Commodore Amiga to prove invalidity. Because of their age, these computers could not connect to the court's display system. B&R obtained permission to bring a video camera and other equipment into the courtroom so that we could send a live feed of the computer screen through the presentation system during the expert's operation of prior art software. Since not all old software can be found or made to run on available computers, we also created several simulations of prior art software that functioned just like the original as described in manuals or seen in old videotape footage.

In the end the jury found that the patents were invalid due to the improper joinder of inventors who had not truly worked together to conceive of the invention. This finding was supported by the testimony of two of the three named inventors who each claimed that they had never worked with each other. The jury also found, based upon the live demonstrations of prior art systems, that the asserted claims were invalid for anticipation.

The jury's findings included: No direct infringement. No induced infringement. Invalidity for improper inventorship. Invalidity for anticipation by prior art. And, in case there was any doubt, Damages = $0.

Michael Murphy, et al v. Harold Simmons, et al. (Dallas, TX) - Breach of Fiduciary Duty / Breach of Contract:

Barnes & Roberts worked with Susman Godfrey and Fish and Richardson during the two-week trial to prove that NL Industries and several of its officers had improperly drained NL EMS of assets in the months leading up to the minority shareholders' sale of their stock back to the company. The jury's award includes $33.7 million in actual damages, $140 million in punitive damages against NL Industries, and an additional $5 million levied against an individual corporate officer. The $178.7 million dollar verdict is believed to be the largest verdict in Dallas County in 2009 to date. Barnes & Roberts provided full trial support including demonstrative creation, exhibit and video database management, courtroom set up and presentation during the trial.
Dallas Business journal
LAW.COM
SYS-CON Media
Fish and Richardson

West v. Perry (EDTX, Vinson & Elkins) - Copyright Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented filmmaker Tyler Perry in defeating accusations that he copied the play "Fantasy of a Black Woman" for his film, "Diary of a Mad Black Woman.
Diary of a Mad Black Woman (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Mathworks v. Comsol Inc. (EDTX, Jones Day) - Copyright Infringement and Breach of Contract:

Barnes & Roberts represented The Mathworks in proving that Comsol had not only breached the parties' contract, but had also copied much of the plaintiff's software into it's own competing software application. The jury awarded damages of $9.9M.
Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice: Copyright verdict in Tyler

Rembrandt v. CIBA (EDTX, Fish & Richardson) - Patent Infringement:

Our client, a private inventor partnered with a technology holding company, Rembrandt, had invented gas-permeable, hydrophilic soft contact lenses which was being infringed by CIBA, one of the most respected names in the contact lens market. The jury found that the patent was both valid and infringed and awarded our client $41M in damages.
Southeast Texas Record | $41 Million Patent Infringement Verdict Awarded in Contact Lens CaseSoutheast Texas Record | $41 Million Patent Infringement Verdict Awarded in Contact Lens Case

KCI v Medela/Blue Sky (DTX, Baker Botts) - Patent Infringement, False Advertising, Unfair Competition and Consipiracy:

Barnes & Roberts represented Medela in this complex case involving vacuum assisted bandages for intractable wounds. After a six-week trial, the jury issued a verdict of non-infringement and found against the plaintiff on their remaining claims.
IPBiz: All appellants lose at CAFC in KCI v. Blue Sky on vacuum bandages

Deep Nines v. McAfee (EDTX, Fish & Richardson) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented the plaintiff, Deep Nines, in this suit. The jury returned a verdict for our client in the amount of $18M finding infringement under the doctrine of equivalents for this computer security software patent.
Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice: Patent verdict in Lufkin case

Texas Instruments v. Talluri (Collin County, TX, Fish & Richardson) - Trade Secrets:

Barnes & Roberts represented Texas Instruments in this case alleging inevitable disclosure of trade secrets if one of its senior engineers was allowed to work for its chief competitor, Qualcomm. After a one-day evidentiary hearing, the Court issued a restraining order preventing the former employee from working at Qualcomm for a period of one year.

Brazos River Authority v. GE Ionics (Brazos County, TX, Vinson & Elkins n.k.a. K&L Gates) - Breach of Contract and Negligence:

Barnes & Roberts represented plaintiff BRA in two trials on this case. The first jury found against BRA but this verdict was vacated and remanded for new trial. At the conclusion of the second trial, a settlement favorable to BRA was reached while the jury was deliberating.
BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GE IONICS, INC., Also Known as Ionics, Incorporated, et al., Defendants, GE Ionics, Inc., Also Known as Ionics, Incorporated; Cajun Constructors, Inc., Formerly Known as Cajun Contractors, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. - AltLaw

Giles v. Wyeth (SDIL, Jones Day) - Product Liability and Inadequate Warnings:

We represented the pharmaceutical company, Wyeth, in this case implicating its anti-depressant drug Effexor as the cause of adult suicide. This three-week trial pitted the emotional testimony from the victim's family against the scientific weight of medical evidence from physicians and epidemiological studies. In the end, the jury found that there was no evidence that the drug caused the victim to take his own life and returned a verdict in favor of our client.
Jacquelyn Giles v. Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, formerly known as American Home Products Corporation

Tailwind/Lance Armstrong v. SCA Promotions (Arbitration, Herman Howry & Breen) - Breach of Contract:

This case revolved around allegations that our client, Tailwind/Lance Armstrong, had breached an agreement by taking banned, performance-enhancing substances in his 2004 Tour de France victory. SCA was under contract to pay Lance Armstrong a bonus of $5M if he won the race, which he did. After the arbitration proceedings, but before the panel issued its ruling, SCA settled the case by paying Armstrong $7.5M.
Lance Armstrong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Allegations Trail Armstrong Into Another Stage - Los Angeles Times

In re Certain Self-Cleaning Litter Boxes (ITC, Baker Botts) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented the complainant, Applica, in the International Trade Commission in their effort to exclude a foreign companies, Lucky Litter and OurPets, from importing devices that infringed it patents. After a two-week trial, the ITC found the patent valid, enforceable and infringed. A general exclusion order was issued with a 100% bond rate. A parallel patent infringement case is pending in the EDTX.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/E7-25099.pdf

Power-One v Artesyn Technologies (EDTX, Fish & Richardson) - Patent Infringement:

Represented Power-One in its infringement contentions against Artesyn tried before Magistrate Judge Love in Marshall Texas. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Power-One finding that Artesyn infringed Power-One's 7,000,125 patent which covers a digital power control system for programming, controlling, and monitoring an array of Point of Load regulators using a data bus for communication with and control of the Point of Load regulators. Power-One stipulated to damages of $100 and received an injunction to keep Artesyn from selling products that use Power-One's '125 patent.

Alcatel/Lucent v. Microsoft (SDCA, Fish & Richardson) - Patent Infringement claims and counterclaims:

Barnes & Roberts represented Microsoft in this massive case involving dozens of patents and at least 6 trials spread across two years reaching from California to Texas to Washington DC. We completed three trials, all in SDCA, lasting a combined 18 weeks. Microsoft overturned the record-breaking $1.5B verdict and won a dismissal in the first trial. Microsoft won on summary judgement in the second part of the case before going to trial. In the interplay of claims and counterclaims, the third trial had mixed results but the fourth trial ended with Microsoft being found not to infringe the Alcatel patent. In late 2008, the parties resolved all of their remaining claims against one another and settled this line of cases.
Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TGIP v AT&T (EDTX, Sidley Austin) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented AT&T in this two-week trial which was interrupted by a hurricane and brought a storm of controversy all its own. The Court had withheld judgement on pre-trial JMOL motions until after the verdict. The jury returned a decision against AT&T for $156M - the largest in EDTX history. However, the Court granted the defendant's JMOL and set aside the verdict finding no infringement as a matter of law.
Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice: Judge Clark Grants JMOL for Defendant in TGIP v. AT&T

American Calcar v American Honda (SDCA, Fish & Richardson) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented Honda in this infringement case asserting 15 patents. After receiving a transfer from EDTX, Honda prevailed at trial on 12 of 15 of the patents. The case is currently in post trial briefing for disposition of the remaining 3 patents.

Elan Pharma v. Abraxis Bioscience (DE, Baker Botts) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented Elan Pharma in this case which was the first nanotechnology patent case to be taken to jury trial. The technology concerned the formulation for nanoparticles that delivered the breast cancer drug, Abraxane. A verdict for our client in the amount of $55M was returned by the verdict.
Bloomberg.com: Health Care

Blackboard v. Desire2Learn (EDTX, McDermott Will & Emery) - Patent Infringement:

Barnes & Roberts represented the plaintiff, Blackboard, in this patent infringement suit against its competitor, Desire2Learn. The patent claims at issue broadly cover an e-learning system. Both companies provide software solutions to universities and the like for students, teachers and administrators to use in an e-learning environment. After trial, the jury found for our client and ordered Desire2Learn to pay $3M in damages.