IN CLOSING... Q 48
BILL LEE HEADED THE APPLE LEGAL TEAM’S VICTORY OVER SAMSUNG THAT WILL LEAD TO A DIVERSIFICATION OF PRODUCTS IN THE MARKETPLACE, ACCORDING TO THE NEW YORK TIMES. HE SPOKE RECENTLY WITH DIVERSITY & THE BAR.
DIVERSITY & THE BAR® JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2013
You have developed one of the country’s most successful IP Litigation practices. Can you tell us your most satisfying victory or moment as an IP Litigator?
T ere are two cases that come to mind. We lost a jury verdict of nearly $2 billion in a case for Abbott in East Texas. While we predicted it would be diffi cult to win the case before that jury, losing was still a disappointment. We appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the court reversed the verdict in its entirety. T e Supreme Court denied certiorari. By that time, the verdict, if it had been sustained, would have totaled $4 billion. T e reversal was very satisfying. Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, 636 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2011). T e second case was the jury trial between Apple and
Samsung which we tried last August in California. We obtained a verdict of over $1 billion for Apple and a fi nding against Samsung on all claims. T e public interest in the case was enormous and the stakes were high. It was a good win. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK (United States District Court, N.D. Cal., San Jose Division)
IP Litigation has become increasingly prevalent these days as our economy becomes more technol- ogy based. What role does IP Litigation play in shaping tomorrow’s marketplace and where do you see the practice going over the next fi ve to 10 years?
For the last 100 years, technology has been a key driver of the national and now international economies. T at will remain true in the years to come. T e protection of intellectual property in a manner that encourages innovation and creativ- ity will be critical. As a result, the global intellectual property laws and the manner in which they are enforced are key. T e largest intellectual property wars result from new and
disruptive technologies and the convergence of technologies. T at was true for the steam engine and later the microproces-
MCCA.COM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52