At Stradley Ronon, we combine our trial skills, honed over the course of countless major trials, with our genuine and substantive IP experience, to represent clients on the most sophisticated and challenging disputes.
In addition to our experience with district court actions, we are familiar with proceedings before the International Trade Commission, directed to import controls as one way to enforce IP rights. We have handled trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings conducted in the PTO to prevent and remove federal trademark registrations, respectively. The procedures applicable to such proceedings are very similar to federal court bench trials. We have also handled PTO patent interference proceedings, which determine priority between competing inventors (i.e., who invented first and who gets the patent). Finally, we have handled domain name disputes before ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) under the UDRP (Uniform Domain-Name Resolution Policy).
Two partners in our IP litigation practice group, Kevin Casey (Chair of the IP Group) and Kevin Goldstein, are admitted to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office bar and have vast experience in IP preparation and prosecution. In addition, each has been lead counsel or has participated as assistant counsel in over 50 IP cases – averaging two or three significant cases per year. Several of these cases have reached trial and most of them have progressed to the stage of active discovery before settling. Their experience in this area builds upon the extensive IP litigation experience and background already well established at Stradley Ronon.
Our IP litigation team also includes leaders from our trial department. By way of example, Stradley Ronon Partner Keith Dutill, a Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers, has successfully represented clients in major patent infringement, copyright infringement, and trade secret cases.
In order to manage IP litigation and control costs, our litigation group uses and is facile with many of the most current software and hardware litigation-related technology tools. For example, the process of making decisions among – then selecting actions while pursuing the chosen option of – litigation, settlement, and ADR in IP cases is complex. Moreover, communication among decision makers is often difficult. One tool that can help facilitate both the process and communication is Decision Tree Analysis (DTA). We incorporate the advantages (Why should I use it?), while noting the limitations (What's the catch?), of DTA. We also use Casemap to streamline litigation and keep the trial team focused on the key issues and critical open questions. In short, we leverage technology in a practical way instead of “leveraging” massive attorney time.
These tools help us to evaluate the options during litigation and to communicate with our clients and other members of the litigation team about those options. Indeed, many times, complex litigation warrants bringing together the talents of different legal groups: in-house counsel, local counsel, settlement counsel, co-counsel and others. We have often been an integral part of successful “team” approaches to IP litigation, using technology to facilitate the necessary communication and build efficient working interrelationships.
One example of our team philosophy is that Stradley Ronon is the only Eastern Pennsylvania law firm that’s a member of Meritas, the world’s largest association of independent business (including IP) and commercial litigation firms. With colleagues in nearly 210 cities in 70 countries, we are in a position to provide our clients with ready access to information about local laws and practices in major markets throughout the world. All Meritas member firms endure a rigorous selection process and ongoing monitoring programs designed to assure responsiveness and high quality legal services.
We at Stradley Ronon view IP litigation as only one tool available in an overall strategy focusing on efficient, cost-cognizant dispute resolution.