qertglow.blogg.se - Champaign trade secrets lawyers

Champaign trade secrets lawyers pro#
Champaign trade secrets lawyers license#

District Court, Central District of Illinois U.S.

Champaign trade secrets lawyers license#

☊V ®, AV Preeminent ®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished SM and Martindale-Hubbell Notable SM are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell ® certification procedures, standards and policies.Website: Admitted: 1974, Illinois and U.S.

Listed, Leading Lawyers Network, 2004-2023.Listed, Managing IP Magazine's World IP Handbook and Survey, "IP Stars: Chicago Patent Stars," 2013-2023.Listed, The Legal 500 United States, Patents: Litigation (full coverage), "Recommended Lawyer," 2023.Listed, Super Lawyers magazine, Illinois Super Lawyers, 2005-2023.Listed, The Best Lawyers in America, Litigation - Intellectual Property Patent Law, 2013-2024.

Champaign trade secrets lawyers pro#

Recipient, Award for Excellence in Pro Bono Service, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the Chicago Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, 2017.

Publicly held clients are involved in fiber containers, OEM automotive components, developmental toys for infants, traffic signaling equipment, orthopedic implants and chemical flame retardants, amongst other varied areas of technology.

Cases profiled in The Wall Street Journal, The American Lawyer, as well as on network television.

Federal court-appointed expert/mediator settling United Technologies Automotive Inc.

He has likewise participated in European Patent Office litigation in Munich, Germany. Target, he halted the sale of a "look-alike" electronic leveling tool through issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. Each of the patents in these two recent cases was, likewise, deemed unenforceable as having been obtained by the respective patent holders through the commission of inequitable conduct before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Kuwayama, a design patent on a gemstone design, was determined to be invalid and not infringed, as was a chemical process patent in Atofina v. Several of Richard's other cases have involved the invalidation, unenforceability and non-infringement of high-profile patents.His practice also involves defending his clients from claims relating to their competitors’ purported intellectual property rights. These cases often involve his clients’ “crown jewel” assets such as key technologies involving wireless communication software, and formulations for polymers-as well as manufacturing and chemical processes associated with those formulations-amongst other technologies. Richard litigates cases involving his clients’ most valuable intellectual property assets, cases involving the infringement of their patented inventions, and/or the misappropriation of their trade secrets, trademarks/branding and copyrights. M3 Systems, for the first time in decades, a jury verdict of anti-trust damages against a patent-enforcing plaintiff was upheld by the CAFC. Jeffrey-Allan Industries, Inc., a hallmark CAFC decision on the issues of patent novelty, non-obviousness and the effects of re-examination. Weaver Popcorn Co., Inc., which serves as an encyclopedia on the commission of fraud before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, as well as in Custom Accessories, Inc. set the standards for "reasonable innocent construction" in commercial defamation actions. Richard was also lead counsel in Golden Valley Microwave Foods Inc. The seminal case before the United States International Trade Commission, In Re Certain Novelty Glasses, established the criteria for the federal exclusion of infringing, foreign-made articles from U.S. Lead counsel in numerous cases over the last four decades that have had significant impact on national intellectual property issues.