David W. Higer - Partner

PDF Print Friendly Page
David W. Higer

Download V-Card

Chicago
Phone: +1 312-862-7029
Fax: +1 312-862-2200
Overview News Publications

Professional Profile

David W. Higer is an intellectual property litigation partner based in the Chicago office of Kirkland & Ellis LLP. He is an experienced trial lawyer with a national practice, including prior and current cases in federal district courts in California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New York and Texas. He also has tried cases before the International Trade Commission and arbitration tribunals. Dave acts as lead counsel or lead counsel equivalent in his cases both in crafting complex litigation strategy and at trial and frequently handles large, complex cases and those involving cutting edge legal and technical issues. His practice focuses on advising clients in all aspects of patents, copyrights and trademarks, including trial and appellate litigation, alternate dispute resolution, patent post-grant review, and the assessment of potential opportunities or risks for particular patents, copyrights or trademarks.

Dave’s patent practice spans a wide range of clients and industries. He has experience litigating cases involving semiconductor technology, digital imaging technology (both hardware and software), optics, data bases, encryption, standards essential patents, telecommunications (both hardware and software), embedded systems, medical devices, and gaming technology. His copyright practice also spans a wide range of clients and industries. He has experience litigating architectural, pictorial, graphic and sculptural, and literary copyrights. He also has experience in litigating complex copyright issues related to international copyright law issues.

Dave’s recent trial practice has resulted in a trial victory in Delaware federal court, arbitration victories, the successful settlement of a highly-publicized dispute in the wireless industry, and the successful settlement of a long-running semiconductor dispute between industry rivals. Over his career, in addition to non-monetary relief, Dave has achieved well in excess of eight figures in settlement value for his clients. Dave has also successfully defended his clients against numerous claims for both monetary and non-monetary relief.

Dave’s appellate practice includes a copyright appeal before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and an amicus curiae brief filed in the United States Supreme Court in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics Inc. (No. 06-937).


Publications

Gaining the Benefit of an Earlier-Filed Inter Partes Review by Applying the IPR Joinder Provisions Under the America Invents Act, NYIPLA BULLETIN 1, 4–6 (Apr. 2014–May 2014).

The U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies “Exceptional” Cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and the Appellate Standard of Review, Kirkland Alert (May 2014).

Parallel Proceedings, THE PATENT LAWYER MAGAZINE (Apr. 2014).

Lighting Rod: Supreme Court Likely, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAGAZINE (Apr. 2014).

Survey of U.S. Court Decisions to Stay Part 3: Where Stays Were Denied, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAGAZINE (Apr. 2014).

Survey of U.S. Court Decisions to Stay Part 2: Where Stays Were Granted, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAGAZINE (Mar. 2014).

En Banc Federal Circuit Confirms Claim Construction is Reviewed De Novo on Appeal, Kirkland Alert (Feb. 2014).

Survey of U.S. District Court Decisions Addressing Requests to Stay a Case Pending Resolution of an Inter Partes Review (Part 1), INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAGAZINE (Feb. 2014).

Survey of U.S. District Court Decisions Addressing Requests to Stay a Case Pending Resolution of an Inter Partes Review, NYIPLA BULLETIN (Dec. 2013–Jan. 2014).

Questions Remain Over Identifying ‘Real’ Parties-in-Interest, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAGAZINE, 56–59 (Oct. 2013).

New Law Reshapes U.S. Patent Landscape, Kirkland & Ellis Private Equity Newsletter (September 2011).

Are Patent Rights Headed to the Races?, Chicago Lawyer, Intellectual Property Section (June 2011).

The 10 Deadly Sins: A Law with Unintended Consequences, 96 Tax Notes 871 (Aug. 5, 2002); 2002 TNT 151-39.


Seminars

USPTO Post-Grant Review Proceedings: Lessons Learned, Questions Pending and Strategic Considerations, 21st Annual Technology & Law Seminar (May 20, 2014).

Lessons Learned/Questions Pending: USPTO Post-Grant Review Proceedings -- Trial Lawyer’s Perspective, Chicago Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, Intellectual Property (April 2, 2014).

Panel Discussion: Pro Bono Copyright Representations and Common Issues, DePaul University College of Law (March 14, 2011).


Courts

2012, Trial Bar for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

2006, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

2005, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

© 2014 Kirkland & Ellis LLP