Law360 has recognized McKool Smith as a “Texas Powerhouse” based on the firm’s courtroom achievements from July 1, 2018, to July 1, 2019. The publication notes that powerhouse firms stand out for “bringing home blockbuster trial victories and defending clients’ trade secrets in bet-the-company litigation” in the Texas market. This is the second consecutive year the firm has garnered this prestigious accolade, and it marks the third time in the past six years.
You can read the firm’s feature profile here.
Over the past year, our Texas attorneys have tallied an impressive string of litigation victories, including:
- A U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruling that all 17 claims of a patent owned by Amgen unit Immunex Corp. were invalid as obvious. Immunex had asserted the patent in California federal court against Sanofi-Aventis US LLC’s drug Dupixent, which is used to treat eczema. Our team successfully explained why Immunex sought such broad claims and why those claims were open to validity challenges, securing a win for Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. at the PTAB in February 2019.
- A $145 million patent infringement verdict on behalf of plaintiff WiLan Inc. against Apple Inc. in the Southern District of California.
- A $10.6 million jury verdict for Optis Wireless Technology LLC and PanOptis Patent Management LLC in their patent infringement suit against Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. The jury in the Eastern District of Texas found in August 2018 that all five of the wireless and video patents owned by PanOptis were valid and had been willfully infringed.
- A defense verdict in a case brought by HTC Corp. and HTC America Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas accusing Ericsson Inc. of flouting its contractual duty to offer licensing fees for its standard-essential cellular patents that were fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory, or FRAND. After a five-day trial in February, McKool Smith attorneys were able to convince a jury that Ericsson hadn’t breached its contractual obligations.
- An International Trade Commission win for TiVo and Rovi Corp. when an administrative law judge found that certain Comcast Corp. receivers infringed two Tivo patents.
