Contact:
Arturo J. González
Unlike most large law firms, Morrison & Foerster tries cases on a regular basis. We try cases throughout the United States
for plaintiffs and defendants, and take pride in the diverse trial teams that serve our clients. Our trial work covers a vast
substantive area, including patent infringement, contract disputes, unfair business practices, fraud, consumer class actions,
antitrust, securities, white collar defense, product liability and mass torts, insurance coverage and bad faith, discrimination
claims, and civil rights. Our partners have tried hundreds of cases to judges and juries. In addition, we have tried hundreds
of cases to arbitrators and administrative bodies.
The mission of our Trial Practice Group is twofold: (1) to ensure that our lawyers are trained on the requisite skills essential
to successfully trying a case; and (2) to pool the resources and experiences of our trial lawyers to maximize the work product
and knowledge that is available to service our clients, and thus to more efficiently and effectively prepare our cases for
trial.
Our recent trial work includes our successful defense of JDSU in a four week jury trial in federal court in Oakland, California,
where we won a complete defense verdict on behalf of JDSU and three former executives on all claims in a class action alleging
securities fraud and insider trading; a victory in a patent claims against EchoStar before the International Trade Commission;
and the acquittal of a former sales executive accused of conspiracy and other counts under the federal Anti-Kickback law.
Trial Preparation Philosophy
In an ideal world, all of our clients’ cases would be resolved without a trial. Litigation, and trial in particular, is stressful
and expensive. Thus, from the moment we begin working on a case, we are looking for efficient ways to resolve the dispute.
However, while we recognize that trials are expensive, and that most cases settle, we prepare each case as if it were going
to trial. We do this because preparing the case for trial is the best way to position a case for favorable settlement. If,
after exhausting all reasonable settlement avenues, the case does not settle, this planning leaves us well-positioned to present
our client’s case to a judge or jury.
Our Firm also recognizes the significant demographic changes taking place in the United States. In most of this country’s
large metropolitan markets, judges (and perhaps more importantly, jurors) are becoming increasingly diverse. Because of the
Firm’s long-standing philosophy of recruiting, training, and advancing women and lawyers of color, we are able to staff our
cases with trial teams that reflect the diversity of the jurors who will decide our client’s case.
Representative Matters
- In April 2009, after a four week trial involving medical robotics, a jury in Santa Clara County Superior Court awarded Hansen
Medical, Inc., over $36 million, finding that the defendant had willfully misappropriated trade secrets and breached two contracts.
- Represented Hartford Casualty Insurance Co. in a coverage and bad faith action brought by an insured of the company in Los
Angeles Superior Court. While slated to be a jury trial, Hartford convinced the court to hold a bench trial before empanelling
the jury to address the "duty to defend" issues. As a result of the court's ruling on that aspect of the case, Hartford obtained
judgment on the remaining issues without the need for the jury trial.
- Morrison & Foerster represents Pioneer Corporation and its affiliates in two patent disputes with Samsung involving plasma
display panel (“PDP”) technology, two of the largest manufacturers of plasma display panels. Pioneer is the plaintiff in both
disputes, one of which is a declaratory judgment action. In September 2006, Pioneer filed an action against Samsung and its
affiliates in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting infringement of two of Pioneer’s patents. Samsung SDI then filed counterclaims,
asserting that Pioneer and its affiliates infringed Samsung’s PDP patents. On October 28, 2008, a jury in the Eastern District
of Texas decided that three Samsung entities had willfully infringed the patents in suit and awarded Pioneer $59.3 million
in compensatory damages. The case involving the declaratory judgment action is set for trial in March 2009.
- In August 2005, plaintiff Abbott Labs filed suit in the Northern District of California against Bayer and Roche, two of the
leading manufacturers of blood glucose meters and strips, asserting infringement of two of plaintiff’s patents. After our
client Bayer won summary judgment on one of the patents, the case was reassigned to a new judge, who consolidated it for trial
with a related set of cases involving Becton-Dickinson and set a trial date within six weeks on the second patent. The court
broke the trial into three phases. Roche settled before trial. After a six-day bench trial in June 2008, in a 54-page opinion,
the court found in Bayer’s favor on all claims. The court invalidated every asserted claim as obvious, and also found the
patent unenforceable because two Abbott employees concealed material information from the Patent Office during prosecution.
Bayer has now prevailed on both patents and all asserted claims.
- Defended Cypress Semiconductor Corporation in a trade secrets trial. The court bifurcated the issue of statute of limitations
and then made a legal ruling adverse to Cypress. We persuaded the court of appeals to stay the trial so that it could rule
on the statute of limitations issue. In May 2008, in a case of first impression, the appellate court reversed and remanded
the case for trial on the statute of limitations issue.
- Successfully represented the parents of a child who was killed by a bus. On the eve of closing arguments, the case settled
for $1 million.
- After a four-week jury trial in federal court in Oakland, California, Morrison & Foerster won a complete defense verdict on
behalf of JDSU (NASDAQ: JDSU) and three former executives on all claims in a class action alleging securities fraud and insider
trading. This is only the second defense verdict in a securities class action since the passage of the Reform Act in 1995,
and only the fifth securities class action even to reach verdict since then. The rarity of a jury verdict for the defense
in such cases was highlighted by the Wall Street Journal, which compared the outcome to a “Cambodian Forest Ox,” one of the
most exotic mammals.
- Obtained a defense verdict for EchoStar in a case where the plaintiff sued essentially the entire cable and satellite television
industry, alleging that it invented the digital video recorder (DVR) in 1991. All defendants other than EchoStar settled shortly
before trial, leaving EchoStar as the sole defendant. After over a week in trial, the jury found all of the asserted claims
invalid as anticipated, obvious, and lacking an adequate written description. This was a rare jury trial win for defendants
in the Eastern District of Texas.
- Successfully represented inventor in a patent infringement suit against Microsoft. The suit, filed in Los Angeles federal
court, involved a software application that links an Excel spreadsheet to an Access database in a live link fashion. After
a four week trial, the jury awarded our client, Mr. Armando Amado, $8.96 million for sales of the software between March 1997
and July 2003. Mr. Amado developed the program in 1990 and then approached Microsoft to sell the program to them in 1992,
which they declined to purchase. Mr. Amado received his patent in 1994. The Court will be awarding additional damages for
the time period July 2003 to present.
- Represented Oakland Coliseum and a former director in a four month trial in Sacramento stemming from the Raiders return to
Oakland. Raiders alleged fraud, negligent misrepresentation and bad faith, and sought $1 billion in damages. Jury found no
fraud or bad faith, returned a defense verdict for the director, and awarded the Raiders $34 million for negligent misrepresentation.
The Raiders dismissed their case against the Director in exchange for a waiver of costs. The appellate court then reversed
the verdict against the Coliseum to complete the defense victory.
- Successfully prosecuted claims by Altera, a Silicon Valley semiconductor chip designer, that Clear Logic infringed the copyrighted
mask work designs of Altera's semiconductor chips and tortiously interfered with Altera's software contracts with customers.
Won 2-week jury trial on all claims and secured a $36 million judgment and permanent injunction order.
- Prosecuted patent case on behalf of University of California against Genentech over a pioneering biotechnology patent involving
human growth hormone. After six-week jury trial in the Northern District of California, the case settled for $200,000,000,
one of the largest settlements in the history of patent law.
- Obtained defense verdict for Bank of America in class action alleging fraud and unfair business practices relating to installment
sales contracts, after one week jury trial in Henderson County, Texas.
- Prosecuted infringement claim on behalf of Electro Scientific Industries to enforce its rights governing he use of lasers
in semiconductor manufacturing. Following six-day trial in federal court in Oakland, jury found willful infringement and awarded
our client $13.1 million.
