Jonathan K. Waldrop, the managing partner of the firm’s Silicon Valley office, represents industry-leading companies in patent and trademark litigation involving interactive web technologies, video-on-demand telecommunications, cable technology, computer-assisted sales processes, medical devices, cooking ovens, gaming systems and complex financial transactions. He is also experienced in handling commercial and antitrust litigation matters.
Jon’s clients include Google, LG, ASUS, Uber and Adobe, world-leading global technology companies, and Cox Communications, the third largest cable television provider in the United States. He has acted as lead trial counsel in many cases for his clients and has a history of achieving favorable jury verdicts, including his representation of Google and YouTube in a case with such broad potential implications that Wired.com declared, “Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Troll’s Claim to Own the Interactive Web.” In a separate patent litigation, Jon achieved a verdict touted as the largest verdict of the year in the district in which it was handed down.
Jon is regularly recognized in The Legal 500, IAM Patent 1000, IP Stars, Best Lawyers, and Super Lawyers. He was named an Intellectual Property Trailblazer by The National Law Journal and a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer in California by The Daily Journal, both of which annually honor individuals who have advanced their intellectual property practice through the use of innovative, creative and winning strategies. He was also named California Practitioner of the Year in Litigation by Managing IP Americas. Jon was listed among the 2020 Black Leaders Worth Watching by Profiles in Diversity Journal. Jon also earned the National Institute for Trial Advocacy’s “Master Advocate” designation, and is a fellow in the Litigation Counsel of America’s Trial Lawyer Honorary Society, in which less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers are invited to join.
Work Highlights
- Uber in securing dismissal of a patent infringement case alleging that Uber’s user application infringed Hailo Technologies’ automated dispatch and payment system patent.
- Google in securing summary judgment based on non-infringement and further granting Google’s motion monetary sanctions in a patent infringement suit brought in the Southern District of Texas by SuperSpeed Software, alleging that “Google Docs” and “Google Drive” infringed two data access patents that SuperSpeed incorporated into software used to accelerate the performance of computers linked to a shared-disk network.
- 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 successfully securing a complete dismissal in a six-patent infringement case 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, as well as obtaining a discretionary denial Apple’s inter partes review petition before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in a decision that was made precedential. 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 device.
- Google, Motorola, LG, and ASUS in a patent infringement case alleging Android-based smartphones and wearables infringed a device security patent. Prior to 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.
- 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.
- Reddit in a patent infringement case that alleges Reddit, as well as 50 other Amazon customers including Airbnb and Square, use Ruby on Rails software implementing the HTTP web protocol, as well as Amazon Simple Storage Service.
- 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.
- 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.
- Adobe customers (e.g. Bed Bath & Beyond, QVC, J.C. Penney, Kohl’s Corporation and Dillard’s) in a patent infringement case alleging infringement of Tejas’s image file formatting patent. By utilizing the customer-suit exception, Kasowitz filed a declaratory judgment action in the Northern District of California against Tejas on behalf of Adobe. This rarely utilized exception allowed Kasowitz to secure a walk-away victory on behalf of Adobe and its customers.
- 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.
- 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 a patent infringement action as part of a joint defense group that included Staples, L.L. Bean, Dillard’s, Drugstore.com, HSN, J.C. Penney, and Rhapsody. The case settled favorably.
Media