Patent Litigation

With decades of experience, Cherian LLP lawyers have managed and tried literally hundreds of patent cases in a wide variety of technologies and business sectors. We team our technology-savvy lawyers with sector-specific experts, technologists and engineers, to place you in the best position to win at every stage of a case whether an IPR, a Markman or jury trial. We are focused on the technologies transforming our world. And we are focused on you, the innovators and disruptors, whom we are privileged to represent.

Bright Data Cases (E.D. Texas) Cherian LLP has been honored to represent an Israeli client, Bright Data (formerly known as Luminati LTD) as it defends itself from well financed infringers of their proprietary Proxy Server patents, the lifeblood of their country. Cherian has been successful in several different courts, including the highly demanding Eastern District of Texas (Marshall) and the Western District of Texas (Waco)

Team Worldwide Corporation v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al. (E.D. Texas)Represented Team Worldwide Corporation (“TWW”), an inflatable products manufacturer, against Walmart and the largest airbed suppliers in the U.S. (a multi-billion-dollar industry). The firm secured a favorable settlement before trial in the underlying litigation.

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Articulate Sys. (N.D. California). Represented Plaintiff Apple in an infringement suit brought against Articulate patent infringement of portions of an Apple patented operating system.

Chrimar Systems, Incorporated v. Foundry Networks, Incorporated. (E.D. Michigan). Represented Brocade Communications (acquired Foundry Networks, Inc.) against Chrimar Systems. The matter involved allegations of patent infringement by Foundry’s incorporation of the “Power-Over-Ethernet” industry standard. (Chrimar had also separately sued all of the other major players in the router and switch industry, including Cisco Systems and D-Link, and had successfully extracted settlements from each of them.) Foundry fought to invalidate the asserted claims and after seven years of protracted litigation, we won summary judgment of patent invalidity based upon obviousness of the asserted claim, and the case was dismissed. Chrimar appealed, but the Federal Circuit summarily affirmed the lower court.

Lucent Technologies, Inc., v. Foundry Networks, Inc. (D. Delaware) and Foundry Networks, Inc., v. Lucent Technologies, Inc. (E.D. Texas). Represented Foundry Networks, Inc., in a four patent litigation matter involving networking patents. Represented Foundry in a separate matter against Lucent in Texas asserting a patent against Lucent VOIP platforms. Lucent agreed to settle the matter on highly favorable
terms to Foundry.

Boston Scientific Corp. v. Medtronic AVE, Inc. (Arbitration). Represented Boston Scientific in a patent infringement claim concerning catheters used in coronary angioplasty.

Cook Inc. v. Boston Sci. Corp. (N.D. Illinois). Represented Defendant Boston Scientific in a patent infringement case related to cardiovascular stents.
Dean v.  Simmons (D. Vermont). Represented Plaintiff Dean on claims of patent infringement case against Richard Simmons for copying of Dean’s patented mechanical exercise device.

NuVasive v. Globus Medical, Inc. (D. Delaware). Patent Jury Trial. Defended Globus in a patent litigation involving spinal implants and surgical instruments. Resulted in a favorable settlement for Globus while case was on an appeal.