A. ジェームス・イズベスタ
パートナー
Overview

ジェームス・イズベスタは、1987年から、知的財産および技術関連問題について顧客に助言すると共に顧客の代理を務めています。担当顧客は広い業界にわたりますが、業務の大半は技術および医療機器企業を対象としています。

イズベスタ氏は、陪審裁判、裁判官裁判、多くの州および連邦の控訴裁判所、および調停において、原告と被告双方の代理を務めてきました。カリフォルニア州北部地区の官選仲裁人のパネルメンバーとして、これまでに40件近い特許、商標、著作権、および企業秘密に関する紛争の仲裁をしています。法廷における仕事の他、顧客に対し、合併、買収、新製品導入、新規株式公開に関する助言も積極的に行っています。IP所有者とライセンシーの双方の代理として、効果的なライセンシング努力を通し、顧客が訴訟を避けるための支援を頻繁に行っています。

イズベスタ氏は、Super Lawyers誌により、知的財産訴訟について2011年と2012年に、そして知的財産について2013年と2014年にカリフォルニア北部の「スーパー弁護士」に選ばれたと共に、 Martindale-Hubbell*により AV®にランク付けされています。

*CV、 BVおよびAVはReed Elsevier Properties Inc.の登録認定マークで、Martindale-Hubbell認定手順の基準およびポリシーに従い使用されるものです。

Experience Highlights

Fujifilm Corporation v. Motorola Mobility LLC

Defended Motorola against Fujifilm's assertion of five patents relating to digital cameras and the transmission of files through a cell phone. After summary judgment and a two week jury trial in San Francisco, Motorola prevailed on four of the five patents (proving two of the patents invalid and not infringed, one patent not infringed, and one patent invalid), limited damages on the fifth patent to less than 1/25th of plaintiff's request, and excluded injunctive relief. The case is currently on appeal.

富士フイルム株式会社 対 Motorola Mobility LLC, No. 3:12-cv-3587 (N.D. Cal. filed 2012年7月10日).

Medtronic v. Edwards Lifesciences

Represented Edwards, the company that first developed prosthetic replacement heart valves, against Medtronic's assertion of four patents related to mitral and aortic surgically implanted prosthetic valves and intra-aortic filters. Edwards counterclaimed for infringement of Edwards' own patents in the area of annuloplasty – the surgical construction of diseased heart valves – and related products. Furthermore, the team initiated inter partes and ex parte reexaminations of five relevant Medtronic patents, successfully winning cancellation of all asserted claims in four of those reexaminations and dramatically narrowing the claims in the fifth. The case was resolved while Edwards' motions for summary judgment of non-infringement were pending, as part of a global settlement between Medtronic and Edwards involving cross-licenses and Medtronic's payment to Edwards of approximately $1 billion dollars.

Medtronic, Inc. et al. v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp, et al., No. 11-cv-01650 (D. Minn. filed 2011年6月24日).

Open Text v. Alfresco

The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of Alfresco Software in a lawsuit involving allegations of patent infringement related to content management systems. The lawsuit involved nine patents from two distinct families of patents, each covering different subject matter. After successfully transferring the case from the Eastern District of Virginia to the Northern District of California, Alfresco invalidated two of the asserted patents at the 12(b)(6) stage under the Supreme Court's Alice standard for patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. The remainder of the case was settled shortly thereafter on confidential terms.

Open Text SA v. Alfresco Software Ltd., et al., 13-cv-04843 JD (N. D. Cal., filed 2013年10月18日).

Comarco and ACCO

Led a team defending ACCO Brands USA and its subsidiary Kensington Microware against allegations that its universal laptop power supplies infringed Comarco's patents. An aggressive strategy that used both a declaratory relief complaint and inter partes review, coupled with successful claim construction and summary judgment motions substantially reduced the value of Comarco's claims. ACCO was then able to obtain releases and licenses with a payment of only $200,000.

ACCO Brands USA, LLC v. Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. Case No. C-11-03478 RS (N. D. Cal., filed 2011年9月1日).

Abbott Medical Optics (fka Advanced Medical Optics) v. Alcon

Represented Abbott Medical Optics (AMO, fka Advanced Medical Optics), a supplier of advanced refractive technologies, as plaintiff in one action and as defendant in three other related actions and in reexamination of patents involving ophthalmic surgical products. Case settled with payment to AMO of $121 million and cross-licenses after AMO obtained jury verdict of infringement and judgment of $235 million and invalidated two of Alcon's patents in reexamination.

Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. v. Alcon Inc., No. CIV.A. 03-1095-KAJ (D. Del., filed 2003年12月3日)

Contract litigation for Taiwanese computer/NB manufacturer

Represented a Taiwanese computer/NB manufacturer in a contract related action before a U.S. District Court in California.

Video Enhancement Solutions v. Epson America

Represented Epson America Inc. as defendant in a patent infringement case related to the reduction of blocking artifacts in video displays. Succeeded in transferring case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Central District of California. The case settled soon after the transfer.

Video Enhancement Solutions, LLC. v. Denon Electronics (USA), LLC. et al., 2:10-cv-04370 (C.D. Cal. filed 2010年6月14日).

In re Maxim Integrated Products Inc. MDL

Defended Union Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo involving numerous patents relating to the security and encryption asserted against mobile banking apps. The cases, along with many others, were consolidated in multi-district litigation in the Western District of Pennsylvania. Obtained early settlements for both clients at less than cost of defense.

Maxim Integrated Prod. Inc. v. Union Bank N.A., No. 12-882 (W.D. Pa. filed 2012年6月27日); Maxim Integrated Prod. Inc. v. Wells Fargo & Co., Case 4:12-cv-00623-RAS (E.D. Tx, filed 2012年10月1日).

TecSec Inc. v. Oracle Corporation, et al.

Represents Oracle Corporation and Oracle America, Inc. in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Virginia. The plaintiff asserted 11 patents related to encryption and network hardware technology against Oracle and several other defendants. In connection with defending Oracle, we performed significant analysis of the network hardware and WSS and OASIS security standards at issue and encryption prior art. The case against Oracle is currently stayed.

TecSec, Inc. v. IBM Corp., et al., No. 1:10-cv-115 (E.D. Va, filed Feb. 5, 2010).

Lochner Technologies LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., Hitachi America Ltd et al.

Represented Hitachi America Ltd. in a patent infringement action on a patent related to modular computer systems. We were successful in settling the case on behalf of Hitachi America Ltd., very early in the case, with no financial recovery for the plaintiff.

Lochner Technologies, LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., et al., No. 10-00430 (E.D. Tex. filed 2010年10月12日).

Surety v. Entrust

Co-counsel for defendant Canadian data security company accused of infringing patent relating to encryption techniques used in creating verifiable time stamps. Conducted the liability-related examinations at trial. Won jury verdict of patent invalidity.

Surety Technologies Inc. v. Entrust Technologies Inc., 1:99-cv-00203-TSE (E.D. Va, filed 1999年2月2日).

Resonate Inc. v. Nortel Networks Corporation

Lead counsel for Alteon Web Systems, which was acquired by Nortel Networks, in patent infringement action relating to switching in large Internet server sites. Won summary judgment of non-infringement. On appeal, certain claim terms were redefined and the matter remanded. Won a second motion for summary judgment, affirmed on appeal.

Resonate Inc. v. Alteon Web Systems, et al, 4:00-cv-03307-CW (N. D. Cal., filed 2000年9月12日).

Molecular Probes v. Texas Fluorescence Laboratories

Lead counsel for plaintiff in patent infringement case involving fluorinated xanthene fluorophores. After district court accepted our client’s position on all disputed claim terms, the defendant took a license and the parties settled.

Molecular Probes, Inc. v. Texas Fluorescence Laboratories, Inc., 3:02-cv-00461-SI (N. D. Cal., filed 2002年1月25日)

Pulse-Link Inc. v. Tzero Technologies Inc.

Represented Tzero Technologies in patent infringement actions relating to ultra wideband communications technologies. The case settled following discovery.

Schreiber Foods Inc. v. Saputo Cheese Inc.

Lead counsel for food products company accused of infringing U.S. patent relating to enzymes used in cheese manufacture. Won summary judgment of non-infringement.

Education

Osgoode Hall Law School(オズグッドホール大学法科大学)、法学士(1987年)

University of California, Davis School of Law(カリフォルニア大学デービス校法学大学院) (1987年)

Princeton University(プリンストン大学)、理工学士、化学エンジニアリング (1983年)

Experience Highlights

Fujifilm Corporation v. Motorola Mobility LLC

Defended Motorola against Fujifilm's assertion of five patents relating to digital cameras and the transmission of files through a cell phone. After summary judgment and a two week jury trial in San Francisco, Motorola prevailed on four of the five patents (proving two of the patents invalid and not infringed, one patent not infringed, and one patent invalid), limited damages on the fifth patent to less than 1/25th of plaintiff's request, and excluded injunctive relief. The case is currently on appeal.

富士フイルム株式会社 対 Motorola Mobility LLC, No. 3:12-cv-3587 (N.D. Cal. filed 2012年7月10日).

Medtronic v. Edwards Lifesciences

Represented Edwards, the company that first developed prosthetic replacement heart valves, against Medtronic's assertion of four patents related to mitral and aortic surgically implanted prosthetic valves and intra-aortic filters. Edwards counterclaimed for infringement of Edwards' own patents in the area of annuloplasty – the surgical construction of diseased heart valves – and related products. Furthermore, the team initiated inter partes and ex parte reexaminations of five relevant Medtronic patents, successfully winning cancellation of all asserted claims in four of those reexaminations and dramatically narrowing the claims in the fifth. The case was resolved while Edwards' motions for summary judgment of non-infringement were pending, as part of a global settlement between Medtronic and Edwards involving cross-licenses and Medtronic's payment to Edwards of approximately $1 billion dollars.

Medtronic, Inc. et al. v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp, et al., No. 11-cv-01650 (D. Minn. filed 2011年6月24日).

Open Text v. Alfresco

The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of Alfresco Software in a lawsuit involving allegations of patent infringement related to content management systems. The lawsuit involved nine patents from two distinct families of patents, each covering different subject matter. After successfully transferring the case from the Eastern District of Virginia to the Northern District of California, Alfresco invalidated two of the asserted patents at the 12(b)(6) stage under the Supreme Court's Alice standard for patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. The remainder of the case was settled shortly thereafter on confidential terms.

Open Text SA v. Alfresco Software Ltd., et al., 13-cv-04843 JD (N. D. Cal., filed 2013年10月18日).

Comarco and ACCO

Led a team defending ACCO Brands USA and its subsidiary Kensington Microware against allegations that its universal laptop power supplies infringed Comarco's patents. An aggressive strategy that used both a declaratory relief complaint and inter partes review, coupled with successful claim construction and summary judgment motions substantially reduced the value of Comarco's claims. ACCO was then able to obtain releases and licenses with a payment of only $200,000.

ACCO Brands USA, LLC v. Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. Case No. C-11-03478 RS (N. D. Cal., filed 2011年9月1日).

Abbott Medical Optics (fka Advanced Medical Optics) v. Alcon

Represented Abbott Medical Optics (AMO, fka Advanced Medical Optics), a supplier of advanced refractive technologies, as plaintiff in one action and as defendant in three other related actions and in reexamination of patents involving ophthalmic surgical products. Case settled with payment to AMO of $121 million and cross-licenses after AMO obtained jury verdict of infringement and judgment of $235 million and invalidated two of Alcon's patents in reexamination.

Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. v. Alcon Inc., No. CIV.A. 03-1095-KAJ (D. Del., filed 2003年12月3日)

Contract litigation for Taiwanese computer/NB manufacturer

Represented a Taiwanese computer/NB manufacturer in a contract related action before a U.S. District Court in California.

Video Enhancement Solutions v. Epson America

Represented Epson America Inc. as defendant in a patent infringement case related to the reduction of blocking artifacts in video displays. Succeeded in transferring case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Central District of California. The case settled soon after the transfer.

Video Enhancement Solutions, LLC. v. Denon Electronics (USA), LLC. et al., 2:10-cv-04370 (C.D. Cal. filed 2010年6月14日).

In re Maxim Integrated Products Inc. MDL

Defended Union Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo involving numerous patents relating to the security and encryption asserted against mobile banking apps. The cases, along with many others, were consolidated in multi-district litigation in the Western District of Pennsylvania. Obtained early settlements for both clients at less than cost of defense.

Maxim Integrated Prod. Inc. v. Union Bank N.A., No. 12-882 (W.D. Pa. filed 2012年6月27日); Maxim Integrated Prod. Inc. v. Wells Fargo & Co., Case 4:12-cv-00623-RAS (E.D. Tx, filed 2012年10月1日).

TecSec Inc. v. Oracle Corporation, et al.

Represents Oracle Corporation and Oracle America, Inc. in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Virginia. The plaintiff asserted 11 patents related to encryption and network hardware technology against Oracle and several other defendants. In connection with defending Oracle, we performed significant analysis of the network hardware and WSS and OASIS security standards at issue and encryption prior art. The case against Oracle is currently stayed.

TecSec, Inc. v. IBM Corp., et al., No. 1:10-cv-115 (E.D. Va, filed Feb. 5, 2010).

Lochner Technologies LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., Hitachi America Ltd et al.

Represented Hitachi America Ltd. in a patent infringement action on a patent related to modular computer systems. We were successful in settling the case on behalf of Hitachi America Ltd., very early in the case, with no financial recovery for the plaintiff.

Lochner Technologies, LLC v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., et al., No. 10-00430 (E.D. Tex. filed 2010年10月12日).

Surety v. Entrust

Co-counsel for defendant Canadian data security company accused of infringing patent relating to encryption techniques used in creating verifiable time stamps. Conducted the liability-related examinations at trial. Won jury verdict of patent invalidity.

Surety Technologies Inc. v. Entrust Technologies Inc., 1:99-cv-00203-TSE (E.D. Va, filed 1999年2月2日).

Resonate Inc. v. Nortel Networks Corporation

Lead counsel for Alteon Web Systems, which was acquired by Nortel Networks, in patent infringement action relating to switching in large Internet server sites. Won summary judgment of non-infringement. On appeal, certain claim terms were redefined and the matter remanded. Won a second motion for summary judgment, affirmed on appeal.

Resonate Inc. v. Alteon Web Systems, et al, 4:00-cv-03307-CW (N. D. Cal., filed 2000年9月12日).

Molecular Probes v. Texas Fluorescence Laboratories

Lead counsel for plaintiff in patent infringement case involving fluorinated xanthene fluorophores. After district court accepted our client’s position on all disputed claim terms, the defendant took a license and the parties settled.

Molecular Probes, Inc. v. Texas Fluorescence Laboratories, Inc., 3:02-cv-00461-SI (N. D. Cal., filed 2002年1月25日)

Pulse-Link Inc. v. Tzero Technologies Inc.

Represented Tzero Technologies in patent infringement actions relating to ultra wideband communications technologies. The case settled following discovery.

Schreiber Foods Inc. v. Saputo Cheese Inc.

Lead counsel for food products company accused of infringing U.S. patent relating to enzymes used in cheese manufacture. Won summary judgment of non-infringement.

Admissions

カリフォルニア州

ワシントン州

コロンビア特別区

Bar Admissions

米国特許商標局

カリフォルニア州全地区連邦地方裁判所

カリフォルニア州西部地区連邦地方裁判所

テキサス州東部地区連邦地方裁判所

合衆国連邦巡回区控訴裁判所

連邦第9巡回区控訴裁判所

Professional & Community Activities

American Bar Association(アメリカ法曹協会)、メンバー

Litigation Counsel of America(米国訴訟弁護士会)、メンバー

Editorial Advisory Board、 MX Update(MX Update編集諮問委員会)、メンバー

Advisory Council, IP Osgoode(IP Osgoode諮問委員会)、メンバー

Publications

「IPにおけるディリジェンス:Yahoo as a Case Study, A Practical Overview, 2016 Patent Law Forum, 2016年10月28日, Tokyo, Japan

Diligence in IP: Yahoo as a Case Study, A Practical Overview, Intellectual Property Law Seminar, 2016年10月25日, Shanghai, China

Defending Against NPEs: Updates to Case Law and Strategies, 2013年12月

Defending Against the NPE, 2011年8月

Updates on Patent Reform 2011, 2011年3月

Exploring the Changing Patent Litigation Landscape, 2010年10月

Early Case Evaluation and Pre-Litigation Counseling, 2010年8月

What Bilski Means for E-Commerce Patents, 2010年7月

Trade Secrets: Cost Effective Protection for Valuable Business Information, 2009年6月

The Ethics of IP Litigation, 2009年4月

Preventatives and Alternatives in IP Disputes – A View of IP Litigation from an Expert Witness and Neutral, 2008年12月

National Standards for Patentability, 2007年10月

As the Supreme Shake Up The Patent World, New Strategies Emerge, 2007年7月

Issues in International IP Management, 2007年4月

The Uncomfortable Role of the Advocate in Claim Construction, 2007年1月

Negotiating Licenses Under The Threat Of Litigation, 2006年12月

“Congress Is Considering Big Patent System Change,” San Francisco Business Times, 2011年4月

“Selecting A Forum From Among The District Courts and The International Trade Commission,” Practicing Law Institute, Patent Litigation 2010, 2010年11月

“A Patently Good Idea,” MX: Medtech Executive, 2010年8月