Brandon H. Brown, P.C.

Represented a global manufacturer of agricultural and industrial equipment as a plaintiff in a patent infringement litigation against two competitor-defendants. Served as lead counsel throughout the case and at trial. After a two-week jury trial, the jury determined that defendants infringed four patent claims, rejected all six of the defendants’ challenges to the patents’ validity and awarded client $16.3 million in damages for the first 2.5 years of the defendants’ infringing sales.

Represented a global manufacturer of digital two-way radio technology in a trade secret misappropriation and copyright infringement case against multi-billion dollar competitor in connection with global dispute over critical wireless technologies. Led the technical case over a three-and-a-half month trial, resulting in a jury verdict in less than two hours in favor of our client on all counts, awarding $764 million in compensatory and punitive damages, which was the total amount requested. The victory was profiled in The Am Law Litigation Daily’s “Litigator of the Week” feature.

Represented an innovative computer vision startup in a five-patent infringement case against competitor in connection with decade-long dispute. Led the infringement case, including by conducting direct and cross examinations, resulting in a jury verdict in less than one hour in favor of our client on all counts, finding willful infringement and awarding $125 million in damages, which was the total amount requested by our client. Post-trial motions for enhancement subsequently increased the award to $375 million and resulted in a permanent injunction. The victory was profiled in The Am Law Litigation Daily’s “Litigator of the Week” feature.

Represented a global manufacturer of video game and entertainment technology in a patent litigation in the Northern District of California. The case resolved with an arbitrator’s finding that our client’s products did not infringe the asserted patent.

Represented a global provider of internet networking technology in multiple actions, resulting in a Determination and Exclusion Order preventing the defendant from importing its infringing products into the United States, and ultimately a $400 million settlement to our client to resolve the dispute. The case was featured in, e.g., Fortune, “Commission Rules Arista Infringed on Cisco Networking Patents”; The Recorder, “Siding with Cisco, ITC Blocks Rival’s Imports”; The Wall Street Journal, “Arista To Pay Cisco $400 Million as Companies Settle IP Disputes.”

Represented a manufacturer of HVAC equipment as a defendant in a patent infringement action in the Northern District of California. After taking over the case from another firm after the close of discovery, successfully argued for the Court to re-open discovery, resulting in the identification of key prior art contained in the Plaintiff’s own files. Over an eight day jury trial, handled cross and direct examinations, resulting in a final verdict of non-infringement in favor of the client and an additional verdict of invalidity of the majority of the asserted patent claims in light of the prior art that was discovered in Plaintiff’s files. The case was featured in, e.g., Law360, “Energy Labs Cleared By Jury In Nortek Patent Dispute.”

Represented a global smartphone manufacturer as a defendant in a patent infringement action in the Northern District of Illinois. Developed infringement and invalidity theories for the asserted patent, deposed expert and fact witnesses, briefed and argued a successful summary judgment motion finding partial patent exhaustion. Over the course of two jury trials, handled direct and cross examinations of technical expert witnesses, resulting in a final verdict of non-infringement in favor of client. The case was featured in Law360, “Jury Clears Samsung In Suit By ‘Original Patent Troll’ Suit,”; Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, “Samsung fends off patent suit,”; Law360, “2nd Jury Clears Samsung In ‘Original Patent Troll’ Suit,”; Bloomberg, “Cascades' Patent License to Google Passes Through to All Android Phones.”

Represented a global power equipment manufacturer as a plaintiff in a patent infringement action in the Middle District of Florida. Managed discovery, developed infringement arguments, and argued at the Markman hearing. The case resolved when the Court issued in an order precluding the defendant from selling the accused products in the United States.

Represented several major wireless device manufacturers and their customers in a district court litigation regarding RAND obligations in the Northern District of Illinois. Developed key technical arguments on the essentiality of asserted claims to the 802.11 standard and the determination of an appropriate RAND rate. The case resolved when the Court determined that all of the asserted patents were subject to a RAND obligation and set a RAND rate. This case has been featured in numerous articles including in the The National Law Journal, which reported: “When thousands of fast food restaurant outlets, coffee shops and hotels were hit with letters demanding $2,300 apiece for Wi-Fi licensing, Kirkland & Ellis came to the rescue. ... The result was a groundbreaking decision by U.S. District Judge James Holderman defining what it means for a patent to qualify as a standard essential and how to determine its price — not to mention a bargain-basement settlement for Cisco.”

Represented a major semiconductor manufacturing company as a complainant in an ITC investigation involving the manufacture of flash memory. Responsible for developing infringement and validity theories for the asserted patent, assisted in deposing expert witnesses, deposed fact witnesses, and assisted in all aspects of briefing and expert witness testimony at trial. The case resolved with an ALJ determination of infringement in favor of client.

Represented a major semiconductor manufacturing company as a respondent in an ITC investigation involving the programming of flash memory chips. Responsible for developing invalidity and non-infringement defenses for one of two asserted patents, and assisted in all aspects of briefing and expert witness testimony at the hearing. The case resolved with an ALJ determination of non-infringement and no domestic industry in favor of client.

Brandon was a summer associate at Saper Law in Chicago (2007), and Kirkland & Ellis in San Francisco (2008).

Prior to finishing law school, Brandon also served as a law clerk at Kirkland & Ellis from 2008–2009.