Representative Litigations

Telebrands Corp. v. Hearthware, Inc.

Telebrands Corp. v. Hearthware, Inc., No. 2:2012-CV-02455 (D. N.J. Apr. 25, 2012). Representation of defendant in action involving trademark infringement under §§ 32 and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition and Unfair Competition under N.J State statute.




Diagnostic Devices, Inc., et al. v. TaiDoc Technology Corp.

Diagnostic Devices, Inc., et al. v. TaiDoc Technology Corp., No. 3:2012-CV-00296 (W.D.N.C. May 10, 2012). Represented medical products manufacturer TaiDoc Technology Corp. in a declaratory judgment action regarding breach of contract, alleged non-infringement and unenforceability of a patent, abuse of process, unfair and deceptive trade practices and libel per se.




Ecolochem, Inc. v. Mobile Water Technology Co.

Ecolochem, Inc. v. Mobile Water Technology Co., No. 4:1985-CV-00834 (E.D. Ark. Dec. 6, 1985), slip op. 690 F.Supp 778 (E.D. Ark. 1988), aff’d, Fed. Cir. Appeal No. 88-1550 (February 24, 1989), etc. Patent infringement litigation brought by Ecolochem regarding its U.S. Patent 4,556,492. Following a bench trial, Senior Circuit Judge Henley found the patent valid and infringed. After Federal Circuit affirmance, Judge Henley denied Mobile’s motion to set aside the




Sashco, Inc. v. Red Devil, Inc.

Sashco, Inc. v. Red Devil, Inc., No. 1:88-CV-01639 (D. Colo. Oct. 11, 1988). This was a Patent infringement litigation involving Sashco’s U.S. Patents 4,776,458 and 4,863,014, for clear caulk cartridges and tubes. Mr. Aitken participated in an evidentiary hearing where the Colorado court found that Red Devil had not violated a previous consent decree. Subsequently, on Red Devil’s summary judgment motion for non-infringement, the court found that Red Devil did