• PDF
  • |
  • |
  • Print

Steven D. Chin

Special Counsel | New York
Download V-Card
T (212) 506-1907
F (212) 506-1800
schin@kasowitz.com

Steven D. Chin is an experienced patent litigator, having successfully argued at Markman hearings, as well as at hearings for dispositive and discovery motions.  Mr. Chin is experienced with trial and appellate practice before federal courts, and has taken and defended the depositions of more than 50 witnesses, including critical technical experts and inventors.  Mr. Chin also has been involved with copyright and trademark matters.

Mr. Chin has represented clients in a broad range of technical fields, including semiconductor fabrication, optical components, computer hardware and software, medical devices, inkjet printing, consumer products, and business methods.

Prior to joining Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, Mr. Chin was at the law firms of Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP and Pennie & Edmonds LLP.

Notable Representations
 
  • JDSU v. Metconnex.  Counsel for plaintiff JDSU in a patent infringement case pending in federal court in Los Angeles.  The case involved tiny movable mirrors created with MEMS technology for routing laser beams.  The case settled with Metconnex agreeing to stop producing the infringing device, which put that company out of business.
  • Modern Creative Solutions v. Dell.  Counsel for plaintiff MCS in a trade secret misappropriation, fraud and breach of contract case pending in federal court in New Jersey.  The case involves product advisor software used to increase sales over the Internet. 
  • Euro RSCG v. Tarzian.  Counsel for plaintiff Euro RSCG in a copyright infringement case pending in federal court in Connecticut.  This case involves the creation of derivative works in copyrighted software used in marketing applications. 
  • Hewlett-Packard v. Gateway.  Counsel for intervenor Intel in a patent infringement case in federal court in San Diego involving computer hardware.  Mr. Chin argued successfully during the course of a two-week Markman hearing.  HP and Gateway settled the case.
  • In re Certain Disk Drives.  Counsel for respondent Cornice in a patent infringement case before the ITC involving portable disk drives.  After Mr. Chin took the deposition of an inventor for one of the patents-in-suit, complainant Seagate dropped the patent from the litigation.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • Plasma Physics v. National Semiconductor.  Counsel for defendant National Semiconductor in a patent infringement case in federal court in New York involving semiconductor fabrication techniques.  Mr. Chin took and defended the depositions of the technical experts, and defended the depositions of all key fact witnesses.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • Plasma Physics v. STMicroelectronics.  Counsel for defendant STMicroelectronics in a patent infringement case in federal court in New York involving semiconductor fabrication techniques.  Mr. Chin took and defended the depositions of the technical experts, and defended the depositions of all key fact witnesses.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • Embs v. Wrangler. Counsel for defendant Wrangler in a patent infringement case in federal court in Ohio involving methods for manufacturing apparel. The case against Wrangler was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction under a strategy developed and executed by Mr. Chin.
  • Amazon.com v. Barnesandnoble.com.  Counsel for defendant Barnesandnoble.com in a patent infringement case in federal court in Seattle involving Amazon.com's 1-Click ordering system.  Mr. Chin participated in a two week preliminary injunction hearing and a successful federal circuit appeal that vacated Amazon.com's preliminary injunction.  During discovery Mr. Chin took and defended the depositions of the technical experts, and defended the depositions of Barnesandnoble.com's Chief Technical Officer as well as other key fact witnesses.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • Hewlett-Packard v. Nu-Kote Int'l.  Counsel for plaintiff HP in a patent and trademark infringement case in federal court in San Jose involving inkjet technology.  Mr. Chin took the depositions of a number of witnesses during discovery and participated in a jury trial lasting more than two months.  During the trial, Mr. Chin prepared one of the key technical experts for his trial testimony.  The case settled after a jury verdict in favor of HP.
  • Agere Systems v. Broadcom.  Counsel for defendant Broadcom in a case involving wireless networking technology.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • American Video Graphics v. Microsoft.  Counsel for defendant Microsoft in a patent infringement case in federal court in Texas concerning video graphics techniques.  The case settled on favorable terms.
  • HTE v. Clark Enterprises.  Counsel for plaintiff HTE in a patent infringement case in New York involving a consumer exercise device.  The case settled on favorable terms after a hearing on HTE's motion for preliminary injunction.

Related Information

Practice Areas

Education

  • William & Mary School of Law (J.D., 1996)
  • SUNY Stony Brook (B.E., 1989)

Bar Admissions

  • New York, 1998

Court Admissions

  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 2003
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, 2003
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 2003
©2013 Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP