Jeff Homrig is a partner in the Silicon Valley office with extensive experience as a litigator and trial lawyer in complex and high-stakes patent cases for some of the world’s most innovative companies, including Apple, Google, Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, NetApp, Oracle, Panasonic, Skype, and Yahoo!. In 2012, Jeff was named by Law 360 as a Rising Star – one of the top five IP attorneys under the age of 40 in the nation.
Jeff is a co-author of the Patent Case Management Judicial Guide, a manual providing guidance to judges about commonly-arising issues in patent cases and how to manage them, the first edition of which was published by the Federal Judicial Center and distributed to federal judges nationwide in 2009 (Second edition forthcoming in 2012). In addition to his work as a patent litigator, Jeff served as a volunteer deputy district attorney for Santa Clara County in 2007, acting as sole trial counsel in misdemeanor criminal cases and taking numerous jury and bench trials to verdict. Jeff also represents veterans and their dependents pro bono in cases relating to disability benefits and discrimination and participated in a pro bono project to enhance enforcement efforts against perpetrators of loan modification scams, as well as to assist those who have been victimized.
Notable Representations
- Eolas v. Google et al.: Trial counsel for Google and YouTube in a Tyler, Texas (E.D. Tx.) patent infringement action in which Eolas and the University of California claimed ownership of the “interactive web.” Among other activities at trial in 2012, Jeff cross-examined one of the alleged inventors of the asserted patents on behalf of all defendants. The jury invalidated all asserted claims after deliberating for just 2.5 hours, defeating claims for hundreds of millions in damages, as well as injunctive relief. This verdict has been hailed in headlines worldwide, including: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Troll’s Claim to Own the Interactive Web,” Wired.com and “Eolas patent trial: Relax! The Internet is saved,” Toronto Star.
- Magsil and MIT v. Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, et al: Jeff successfully represented Hitachi and Shenzen Excelstor, obtaining summary judgment that the asserted MIT patent is invalid and thereby defeating the plaintiffs’ $100 million damages claims and request for an injunction against the sale of Hitachi hard drives containing TMR technology. Jeff also represents Hitachi before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in connection with the plaintiffs’ appeal of the invalidity judgment. The win was featured as one of Corporate Counsel's Top 10 IP Litigation Wins of 2011.
- Convolve v. Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, et al: Jeff represents Hitachi in this Eastern District of Texas patent litigation concerning noise reduction technology in disk drives, in which the plaintiff sought nearly $200 million in total damages. At trial in July 2011, Jeff served as second-chair for Hitachi, which obtained a favorable jury verdict.
- Eidos v. Skype: Jeff represents Skype in this District of Delaware patent litigation involving non-contemporaneous communication (i.e., voicemail) technologies.
- Grobler v. Apple: Jeff represents Apple in this Northern District of California patent litigation involving data vending system technology.
- MasterObjects v. Google: Jeff represents Google in this Northern District of California patent case involving AJAX and web search technologies.
- Jang v. Boston Scientific: Jeff represents Dr. G. David Jang in this Central District of California litigation involving cardiovascular stents. After replacing original counsel following an adverse judgment in the district court, Jeff and the Kasowitz team represent Dr. Jang in his appeal of that decision to the Federal Circuit.
- Walker Digital v. Yahoo!, et al.: Jeff represents Yahoo in two mutli-defendant patent litigations. The cases, both of which are venued in the District of Delaware, involve SmartAds and on-line gaming technologies.
- TransPerfect v. MotionPoint: Jeff represents TransPerfect in this patent litigation between competitors concerning website translation technologies. The case is venued in the Northern District of California.
- NetApp v. Sun Microsystems: Mr. Homrig recently represented NetApp, litigating both offensive and defensive claims, in a massive patent battle between competitors involving 40 asserted patents covering file system, networking, clustering, and storage technologies across three cases in the Northern District of California. Prior to settlement, which occurred in the midst of a summary judgment phase, NetApp secured summary judgment of non-infringement as to four Sun patents and successfully opposed Sun’s effort to obtain summary judgment against NetApp's claims.
|
|
Related Information
Education
-
University of California at Berkeley
(J.D., 2001)
-
University of California at Berkeley
(B.A., 1995)
Court Admissions
-
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2002
-
U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2002
-
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, 2005
-
U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, 2005
-
U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 2006
-
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, 2010
Associations / Memberships
|