Darcy L. Jones is a member of Kasowitz’s Intellectual Property group, where she practices in the areas of patent and trade secret litigation. She represents clients in diverse and complex matters in all phases of litigation in state and federal courts, from pre-filing investigation through post-trial briefing and appeal.
Darcy has considerable lead counsel and trial experience in patent infringement litigation involving telecommunications, computer hardware and software, medical devices, electrical and mechanical technologies, and pharmaceuticals. She frequently litigates high-stakes matters for some of the largest telecommunications and technology companies in the world, including Verizon, Google, LG, ASUS and Motorola. Darcy regularly appears in federal courts around the country, including the Eastern District of Texas, Delaware, and the Northern and Central Districts of California.
Darcy has been recommended by The Legal 500 as a leading lawyer in the Patent Litigation: Full Coverage category. She is also recognized in IAM Patent 1000 as a leading patent attorney in California.
Darcy is an active member of the Women of Excellence Network, a group dedicated to advocating and promoting diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. Additionally, Darcy was selected to participate in the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) fellowship program, which offers diverse, high-potential attorneys a year-long, in-depth program devoted to relationship-building, in-person training and peer-group projects. Upon the completion of her fellowship, Darcy continues to remain involved with the organization by participating in the LCLD Success in Law School Mentoring Program, where she coaches and mentors law students.
- Verizon as lead trial counsel in numerous patent infringement matters involving cellular communication hand-offs, cellular phone hotspot technology, data transmission protocols, network extender products, audio communication systems for computer networks and interactive media guides.
- Google, Motorola, LG, Samsung, and ASUS in successfully securing a complete dismissal on behalf of all clients in a patent infringement case alleging Android-based smartphones and wearables infringed a device security patent. Prior to the dismissal, Kasowitz secured a critical and rarely achieved motion to transfer venue, from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California, following a one-day evidentiary hearing on behalf of all clients.
- MV3 Partners in securing a victory in a claim construction hearing against streaming media company Roku for patent infringement in the Western District of Texas. As alleged in the complaint, Roku earns hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and profit selling streaming media players and smart TVs nationwide that incorporate MV3’s patented invention.
- Google in securing a complete dismissal in a patent infringement challenge brought by Data Engine Technologies in the District of Delaware. Data Engine alleged that Google Sheets infringed patents which purportedly covered the Quattro Pro for Windows® spreadsheet program sold by Borland Software Corporation. Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark found that the asserted claims were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter and thus invalid, and granted Google’s motion to dismiss. This matter originally began as a six-patent case against Google, which Kasowitz successfully reduced to three patents.
- Fintiv in defeating Apple’s motion to transfer venue of Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc. from the Western District of Texas to the Northern District of California. The complaint in the action alleges that Apple Wallet and the Apple Watch infringe Fintiv’s patent relating to the management of virtual cards stored on mobile devices.
- ASUS in various patent infringement cases involving a voice-based digital assistant for electronic devices, adaptive antennas, beam switching technologies, and a Multi-Input Multi-Output Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing system.
- Google in a patent infringement case in California federal court in which Google seeks a declaration that it has not infringed Eolas Technologies’ patent covering interactive web browser functions. The Federal Circuit granted Google a rare writ of mandamus, confirming that the judge in the initial ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas had unfairly committed a “patently erroneous error” against Google. The Federal Circuit’s decision allowed Google to transfer the case to the Northern District of California. This is the third case involving Google and Eolas in which Kasowitz has served as trial counsel for Google.
- Kasowitz served as trial counsel for Google and YouTube in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement action brought by Eolas and the University of California. Kasowitz secured a jury verdict of patent invalidity, defeating claims for hundreds of millions in damages and injunctive relief. The verdict was hailed in the media, including “Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Troll’s Claim to Own the Interactive Web,” by Wired.com.
- Kasowitz represented Google in a patent infringement case brought in California federal court in which Google and J.C. Penney sought declarations that they have not infringed two Eolas patents covering interactive web browser functions. The case ultimately settled favorably.
- LG in a seven-patent infringement case involving USB chargers in the Eastern District of Texas. Plaintiff Fundamental Innovation Systems licensed the patents-in-suit from Blackberry, and asserts infringement against several high-profile companies, including Huawei and ZTE.
- Google in a patent infringement case alleging that Google Drive infringed Hall Data’s database synchronization patent. Kasowitz won a motion to transfer venue, from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California.
- Adobe in a patent infringement matter alleging numerous high-profile companies, including technology giants Apple and Hewlett Packard, violated PanTaurus' patent describing a secure computer system.
- Recreational Equipment (REI) in patent litigation action as part of a defense group that included Staples, L.L. Bean, Dillard’s, Drugstore.com, HSN, J.C. Penney, and Rhapsody. The case settled favorably.
- Watson Pharmaceuticals (now Teva Pharmaceuticals) in a Hatch-Waxman trial case relating to Aplenzin®.
- Teva Pharmaceuticals in two trials of Hatch-Waxman cases relating to Prevacid® products.
- United Promotions in trade secret litigation and arbitration involving quaternary ammonium products.
- Teva Pharmaceuticals in summary judgment in a case involving Crestor®.
- Bains Ultra in litigation involving trademark counterfeiting and patent and copyright infringement relating to jetted bathtub products.