Page 13 - CLT020121

NEWS FEBRUARY 1, 2021 ¦ 13

complex, global disputes across multiple venues It was five years of hard-fought litigation, but we
and through all levels of appeal is what we are best were able to obtain favorable outcomes for Gilead
known for. in every case.
A year ago, we obtained a $175 million settlement In February 2020, Fish won a $31.2 million jury
for our client Power Integrations (PI) after 15 long verdict in the District of Delaware for Swiss clients
years of competitor-to-competitor litigation against Wasica Finance GmbH and BlueArc Finance AG in
Fairchild Semiconductor and ON Semiconductor. their long-running patent battle against Schrader
The litigation has spanned multiple venues includ- International Inc. and three other Schrader com-
ing district courts, appellate courts, the PTAB, and panies over technology related to tire pressure
the ITC in the U.S., as well as courts in China and monitoring systems. The case was the latest chap-
Taiwan. We won multiple patent infringement ver- ter of an international patent dispute that started
dicts, several multimillion-dollar damages awards, nearly 20 years ago between the parties. Wasica
and permanent injunctions against hundreds of and BlueArc sued Schrader in the U.S. in 2013 after
infringing Fairchild products. The settlement came years of alleged infringement, and the case spanned
within a year of our winning two jury verdicts and a the district court, PTAB, and Federal Circuit. In July
precedential appeal at the Federal 2020, the court refused Schrader’s
Circuit affirming an earlier PTAB request for JMOL or a new trial
win. The Federal Circuit decision and awarded our client $12.1
made new law regarding the re- million in prejudgment and post-
lationships that govern the time judgment interest, for a total of
bar in inter partes review proceed- When you are number one, $43.3 million in damages.
ings—effectively ending Fairchild/ you want to stay number
ON’s strategy to defeat PI’s rel- one, and that means
Where are you looking to build
evant patents through IPRs. With constantly improving how or expand in the next year?
this final “nail in the coffin,” PI’s we service clients and how We are continuing to grow our
competitor had no place to go but U.S.-based litigation work for
the negotiating table. we help them meet their clients who are outside the U.S.
business objectives. We handle work for a significant
We also recently closed the
latest chapter in client Gilead’s number of clients in Europe, and
ongoing patent infringement bat- we have been enormously success-
tle with Idenix Pharmaceuticals ful developing work from leading
over Gilead’s blockbuster hepati- technology companies in Asia, in-
tis C drugs. In October 2019 (en banc denied April cluding South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and China. We
2020), the Federal Circuit denied, in a precedential opened an office in Shenzhen, China, in the begin-
decision, Idenix’s bid to reinstate a $2.5 billion ver- ning of 2019 to help us meet the needs of clients in
dict that we reversed on JMOL 18 months earlier. At this region, and to support our continued expansion
the time, it was the largest patent damages award in efforts in this region.
history, but we were confident in our ability to ul- One specific practice area we are particularly
timately prevail. This global dispute included trials focused on expanding is trade secret litigation. I
and proceedings in eight different countries includ- recently (in July) led and secured a favorable Ini-
ing Norway, the U.K., Canada, Germany, Australia, tial Determination in a rare trade secret case at the
Japan, South America, and the U.S. We maintained ITC for three China-based clients (Rebenet) who
a consistent strategy and vision throughout all the were sued in the ITC for alleged misappropriation
cases so that no position was taken in the interna- of trade secrets and tortious interference with con-
tional litigation that would jeopardize Gilead’s final tractual relationships. The complainants had sought
U.S. case, which represented the biggest market.
¦ Continued on PAGE 14

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune