Practice Area
Patent & Trademark Litigation
“We may be able to help you with IP litigations matters in Nevada, including patent and trademark litigation matters.”
Contact
3280 W. Hacienda
Las Vegas, NV 89118
We Can Help
IP Litigation
Our attorneys may be able to help you in patent and trademark litigation matters in U.S. district courts. We have significant experience in IP litigation matters, including domain name disputes. Representative samples of our work are shown below. Please contact us for more information.
Recent Federal Litigation
• Penn State v. Keystone Alternatives (Case 3:2-AT-6000) (2020), U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (trademark infringement/cybersquatting).
• Blue Water Innovations v. Vevazz (Case 6:20-cv-774) (2019), U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming (Settled on favorable terms).
• Blue Water Innovations v. Vevazz (Case 6:20-cv-774) (2019), U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Venue successfully changed).
• Innovative Staffing v. ISHR (Case No. 91214407) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented respondent and prevailed in cybersquatting/trademark opposition proceeding).
• Avus Holdings v. Next Distributions (Case 2:19-CV-228) (2019), U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (patent infringement).
• The Joint Sugarhouse v. I4 Solutions (Case No. 2:16-CV-151) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing Defendants in copyright infringement action).
• Strong College Students v. CHHJ Franchising (Case No. 2:12-CV-1156) U.S. District Court for District of Arizona (represented plaintiff in cybersquatting matter lost on summary judgment).
• Goulding v. Hill (Case No 2:14-CV-905), U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (cybersquatting case representing Plaintiff terminating with transfer of the disputed domains).
• EZQuest v. Baorui (Case No. 2:12-CV-730) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (prevailed representing plaintiff in cybersquatting matter and secured preliminary injunction).
• Halo Board v. Equalia, LLC (Case No. 17-1658) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (patent infringement matter settled on favorable terms).
• Equalia, LLC v. Kushgo, LLC (Case No. 2:16-cv-2851) U.S. District Court for District of Nevada (patent infringement matter settled on favorable terms).
• RMV Enterprises v. ksoftware.com (Case No. 1:12-CV-335) U.S. District Court for the District of Virginia (prevailed representing plaintiff in in rem cybersquatting matter).
• Bad Apple, LLC v. Linear Magnitude, Inc. (Case No. 2:17-cv-76) U.S. District Court for the District Utah (settled on favorable terms).
• Fashion C.C. v. Apple Computer (Case No. 2:10-CV-195) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing plaintiff settled with permanent injunction).
• Skywalker Holdings v. YJ IP (Case No. 1:16-CV-64) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing defendant in patent infringement matter).
• Carpenter v. myschool (Case No. 1:15-CV-212) U.S. District Court for the District of Virginia (represented defendant in cybersquatting matter lost on summary judgment days before trial).
• Innovative Staffing v. ISHR (Case No. 2:14-CV-927) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing defendant settled on favorable terms).
• International Marketing v. Bradley Morris (Case No 1:10-CV-26) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (prevailed representing Plaintiff with case dismissal).
• Atkinson v. Ronald Fisher (Case No. 2:09-CV-601) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented Plaintiffs in fraud action).
• Web Entertainment Limited v. y8.org (Case No. 1:14-CV-1416) U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (represented defendant in settled cybersquatting matter).
• Robinson v. DEFY Waterflight (Case No. 2:16-CV-833) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing defendant in patent infringement matter).
• Denis Reah v. Electronics Show Place (Case No. 2:09-CV-601) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented defendant in patent infringement case successfully dismissed for lack of jurisdiction).
• Denmel Holdings v. BlueLounge (Case No. 2:15-CV-87) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented defendant in patent infringement action, settled on favorable terms).
• Associated Recovery v. Butcher (Case No. 2:16-CV-126) U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (represented plaintiff in cybersquatting matter involving 200 domains).
• MeridainLink v. DH Holdings (Case No. CMB2013-00008) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (represented complainant in post-grant review proceeding before the PTAB).
• Sater v. Kriss (Case No. 2:16-CV-932) U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (cybersquatting matter).
• American Covers v. Rok Imports (Case No 2:12-CV-279) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented defendant in patent infringement matter in which defendant successfully dismissed).
• Savage Logistics v. Savage Companies (Case No. 4:15-CV-5015) U.S. District Court for the District of Washington (representing plaintiff in trademark infringement matter).
• Savage Companies v. Savage Logistics (Case No 2:16-CV-265) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing defendant in trademark infringement matter).
• Planet Blue v. Harmonix (Case No. 1:99-MC-9999) U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (represented defendant in patent infringement matter).
• Planet Blue v. OC3 Entertainment (Case No. ) U.S. District Court for the District of California, Northern Division (represented defendant in patent infringement matter).
• Park City Transportation v. Park City Limousines (Case No. 2:15-CV-24) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (representing defendant in trademark infringement matter).
• Matthew Crowder v. Heavy Lifting (Case No. ) U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (cybersquatting case).
• West Coast Trends v. Ogio International (Case No. 6:10-CV-688) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (represented plaintiff in patent infringement matter settled on favorable terms).
• Universal Trim Supply v. K & K Companies (Case No. 2:09-CV-18) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented defendant in patent infringement matter settled without payment).
• Bullex v. JinHakYoo (Case No. 2:10-CV-668) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (prevailed representing plaintiff in cybersquatting matter with injunction).
• RentMaster v. Shain Trading Corporation (Case No 2:10-CV-319) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented plaintiff in cybersquatting case dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction).
• TruckMaster Logistics Systems v. Internet Enterprises (Case No. 2:09-CV-374) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (settled representing counterclaimant in cybersquatting matter involving truckmaster.com).
• Rinehart v. Eighty B.N. (Case No. 120700582) Utah’s Second Judicial District Court (prevailed representing plaintiff in rare state court cybersquatting case involving the Lanham Act (a federal statute)).
• FPS Games v. Kyle Meyers (Case No. 91208378) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented respondent and prevailed in cybersquatting/trademark opposition proceeding).
• Phi-ten USA v. Rocky Mountain School of Baseball (Case No. 1:10-CV-145) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented plaintiff in trademark infringement matter).
• PrizeWise v. Oppenheimer (Case 2:07-CV-792) U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (represented plaintiff in breach of NDA matter which was lost on summary judgment).
• JIVE Commerce d/b/a Vino Grotto v. Wine Racks America (Case 1:18-CV-49) (2019), U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (trademark infringement).
• Fashion C.C. v. Little (Case No. 91217375) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition).
• Alamo v. Wagmar Technologies (Case No. 91227082) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented respondent and settled in cybersquatting/trademark opposition).
• Strong College Student Moving v. Freidman (Case No. 92058063) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition).
• Elevation Distillery v. Salt Lake Distillery (Case No. 91217045) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition settled on favorable terms).
• Oceanside Capital v. AB (Case No. 91205819) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition settled).
• Under Armor v. Gatlin (Case No. 91203875) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented respondent in trademark opposition).
• Scimone v. Tinnus (Case No. 92051876) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition).
• Savage Logistics v. Savage Companies (Case No. 91221522) U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) (represented complainant in trademark opposition).
• Sock City, Inc. v. Oceanside Capital Corp (Case 2:19-CV-831) (2020), U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (cybersquatting case under Lanham Act).
• Aperture Net v. Kyocera International (Case 3:19-CV-2091) (2020), U.S. District Court for Southern District of California (patent infringement).
• Sealed Case
