Back to top



Appeals Before The Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit:

Stant Manufacturing v. Gerdes GMBH, Appeal No. 07-1086 (affirmed favorable jury verdict of non-infringement)

Motorvac Tech v. Norco Industries, Appeal No. 05-1481 (affirmed favorable verdict of willful infringement)

Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. Scimed Life Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 00-1454 (overturned adverse summary judgment of non-infringement)

Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 00-1205, 1214 (affirmed favorable judgment as matter of law of non-infringement)

Origin Medsystems, Inc. v. General Surgical Innovations, Inc., Appeal No. 98-1416 (overturned adverse summary judgment on unenforceability)

Hess v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Appeal No. 96-1066 (affirmed favorable disctrict court decision on inventorship)

Litigation In Federal District Courts:

San Francisco Technology, Inc. v. Elkay Plastics Co., No. 11-291, (Northern District of California) (winning dismissal of false marking complaint)

Coach, Inc. v. Asia Pacific Trading Co., 676 F. Supp. 2d 914 (Central District of California) (winning summary judgement of no liability for defendant Mirage Eyewear)

ACCO Brands USA, LLC v. Accentra, Inc., Case No. 07-1401 (Northern District of Illinois) (winning dismissal of declaratory judgment)

Stant Manufacturing v. Gerdes GMBH, Case No. 02-CV-1653 (Southern District of Indiana) (winning jury verdict of no infringement in favor of current products)

Norco Industries Inc. v. Motorvac Technologies Inc., Case No. CV 02-503 DOC, (Central District of California) (winning jury verdict of willful infringement in favor of Norco, with an award of attorneys fees)

International E-Z Up, Inc. v. Caravan et al., Case No. C01-06530 (Central District of California)

Carter v. World Famous Sports, Inc., Case No. EDCV 00-672 (Central District of California) (obtained consent judgment in favor of Carter)

Carter v. Variflex, Inc., Case No. C98-0167 (Central District of California)

Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. and Guidant Corp., Case No. 97-2459, 182 F.Supp.2d 810 (District of Minnesota) (winning a directed verdict in favor of Advanced Cardiovascular Systems in a jury trial)

Cordis Corporation; Expandable Grafts Partnership v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.; Guidant Corporation; Arterial Vascular Engineering, Inc.; Boston Scientific Corporation and Scimed Life Systems, Inc., Case No. 97-550-SLR (District of Delaware)

Rosendahl v. Utter et al., Case No. C97-1835 (District of Arizona)

Sherwood Medical Co. v. IVAC Medical Systems, Inc., Case No. 96-CV-2083 (Southern District of California)

KD Kanopy, Inc. v. International E-Z Up, Inc., Case No. C95-B-2860 (District of Colorado)

Atwood Industries v. Norco Industries, Case No. 3:94 CV 155 AS, (Northern District of Indiana) (dismissed in favor of Norco, who was awarded attorneys fees)

Digital Instruments, Inc. v. Topometrix, Inc., Case No. C93-20900 (Northern District of California)

Camino Laboratories Inc. v. Nellcor Inc., Case No. 92-3444 (Northern District of California)

American Home Products Corporation v. California Biological Vaccine Labs., Case No. CV90-2052-ER (Central District of California) (winning summary judgment of patent invalidity)

Randomex v. Scopus, Opinion published at 7 USPQ2d 1050 (winning judgment and appeal in favor of Randomex)

Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. SciMed Life Systems, Inc., Case No. 4-87-733 (District of Minnesota - Fourth Division)

C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Case No. C 86-20552 WAI (Northern District of California) (jury trial verdict in favor of Advanced Cardiovascular Systems)

Siemens v. Puritan Bennett, Case No. 86-1728 E(CM) (Southern District of California) (jury verdict in favor of Puritan Bennett)

Dolfin Corporation v. Jem Sportswear, Inc., Case No. 81-1583 (Central District of California) (winning injunction against trademark infringement and an accounting of damages)

Other Litigation

In addition to the cases listed above, Fulwider Patton LLP has litigated many other matters relating to intellectual property before various state courts and arbitrations throughout the United States. Fulwider Patton LLP has also represented clients before administrative agencies such as the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the International Trade Commission, and the National Arbitration Forum (domain name disputes).