Conner IP draws upon founder Clint Conner’s broad experience helping clients around the world with business-critical matters. Through this experience, Conner honed communication and management skills for effectively representing any client, regardless of size or location.
Over nearly two decades, some of the biggest names in business have trusted Conner to handle business-critical issues and he has delivered. He has achieved outstanding results in a variety of matters for both plaintiffs and defendants, and he brings an undefeated track record in patent litigation.
-
Federal Court
Recently achieved dismissal of four consecutive patent infringement cases, in each case before clients accused of infringement had to answer the complaint and without clients having to make any payment to the patentees.
MiiCs & Partners, America, Inc. v. Toshiba Corp. et al. (D. Del.): Led team to historic complete defense victory for multinational company in an 11-patent infringement suit over LCD panel technology.
Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Vizio, et al. (E.D. Va.): Defended multinational company in a three-patent infringement suit relating to point-to-point Internet technology.
Nalco Co. v. Baker Hughes Inc. (S.D. Tex.): Represented industrial chemical company against one of the world's largest oil field services companies in patent-based antitrust suit.
Mariner IC Inc. v. Funai Electric Co., Ltd., et al. (E.D. Tex.): Defended multinational company in a two-patent infringement suit relating to SoC technology.
Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v. Google Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.): Defended multinational company in a two-patent infringement suit relating to remote printing technology.
Battle Toys, LLC v. LEGO Systems, Inc. (D. Del.): Defended toy company and obtained Consent Judgment of Noninfringement from the plaintiff dismissing the case without payment shortly before trial.
Anvik Corp. v. Nikon Precision, Inc. (S.D. Cal.): Defended multinational company in a 7-patent infringement suit accusing photolithography technology used in manufacturing most of the world’s large-panel displays of infringement.
CyberSource Corporation v. Retail Decisions, Inc., et al. (N.D. Cal.): Co-authored a motion for summary judgment that resulted in one of the first decisions invalidating a patent for claiming unpatentable subject matter following the Federal Circuit's Bilski decision.
In re: Halftone Color Separations (C.D. Cal.): Defended multinational company in a Multi-District Litigation involving patent infringement claims relating to printer color toning technology.
Intevac, Inc. v. Unaxis USA, Inc. (C.D. Cal.): Enforced patent on behalf of market leading hard disk drive media manufacturing company against principal competitor, and successfully defended the validity of asserted patent in inter partes reexamination.
H.I.G. Capital Management, Inc. v. Huntsman Gay Capital Partners LLC (M.D. Fla.): Defeated a motion for temporary restraining order in trademark litigation shortly before an important industry conference for the client.
International Trade Commission Investigations
In the Matter of Certain Child Carriers, Components Thereof and Products Containing the Same (ITC): Lead counsel for industry leading BabyBjörn in investigation relating to child carrier patents.
In the Matter of Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing Same (ITC): Achieved termination of investigation relating to point-to-point Internet technology.
In the Matter of Certain Load Supporting Systems, Including Composite Mat Systems, And Components Thereof (ITC): Lead counsel for multinational companies in investigation asserting patents relating to heavy duty rubber mat technology.
In the Matter of Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same and Products Containing Same (ITC): Lead role in enforcing patents relating to rare earth magnet compositions and manufacturing methods against 29 respondents.
In the Matter of Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing (ITC): Defended multinational company in investigation asserting patents relating to LED technology.
In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory and Products Containing Same (ITC): Defended company in investigation asserting patents regarding flash memory.
In the Matter of Certain Voltage Regulators, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (ITC): Defended company in investigation asserting patents regarding voltage regulators.
-
IPR2016-00462 (regarding U.S. Patent No. 6456352): PTAB instituted IPR on all four grounds set forth in petition challenging both claims asserted against multinational client in parallel litigation. Final written written decision held that the challenged claims are unpatentable on three of four grounds (declining to decide the fourth ground as unnecessary).
IPR2015-01525 (regarding U.S. Patent No. 6816213): PTAB instituted IPR on all six grounds set forth in petition challenging all claims asserted against multinational client in parallel litigation. PTAB granted patent owner’s request for adverse judgment, thereby cancelling the challenged claims.
IPR2015-01497 (regarding U.S. Patent No. 5790092): PTAB instituted IPR on the single ground set forth in petition challenging all claims asserted against multinational client in parallel litigation. Final written decision held that the challenged claims are unpatentable on the ground set forth in the petition.
-
New York (2004)
California (2006)
Minnesota (2014)
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of California, Central District of California, Southern District of New York, Eastern District of New York, District of Minnesota, Eastern District of Texas, Western District of Texas, District of Colorado
Conner IP can help you outside the courtroom as well — in licensing, applying for patent or trademark protection, developing strategy, crafting policies, valuing and managing IP assets, technology transactions, joint venture technology, evaluating IP in M&As, developing IP portfolios, enforcing IP rights, and with data privacy issues and policies.
For example, Conner IP recently:
Counseled medical device company regarding development agreement with hospital
Took over prosecuting an application for registration of an industrial machinery part maker’s primary trademark after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had rejected the application on multiple grounds, and overcame all grounds for rejection including likelihood of confusion rejections based on four different trademarks
Assisted company with crafting policies to prepare for litigation
Assisting company with sale of patent assets directed to cybersecurity and security for financial transactions
Assisting company with patent enforcement strategy
Representing company in mediation against German competitor regarding cross patent infringement allegations relating to battery technology
Conner’s experience as an IP attorney includes the following technologies: Internet, networking, software, cyber security products, WiFi, H.264, semiconductors, semiconductor manufacturing, coin cell batteries, Li-Ion batteries, photolithography, hard disk manufacturing, medical devices, physician efficiency programs, LCDs, LEDs, CCFLs, rare earth magnets, digital cameras, optics, imaging and printing, wireless network protocols, GUI interfaces, navigation systems, visual search technology, online real-time auction systems, interactive programming guides, multi-position ladders, impact protection technology, helmets, crude oil desalting processes, among others.