Luke L. Dauchot, P.C.

Staton Techiya, LLC et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.
United States District Court • Eastern District of Texas (May 2024)

• “Unclean hands” defense win for Samsung in patent litigation involving AI and
  mobile phone technology. The Court found that the patent owner had used
  information stolen from Samsung by two former in house attorneys to build its
  case.
• Case was profiled in Law360, “Samsung Beats Patent Suit Due To Misconduct
  By Ex Attys” (May 24, 2024) and other publications.

Rick Sasso, M.D. v. Medtronic PLC
Indiana Superior Court, Kosciusko County (September 2023)

• Lead counsel for Medtronic in commercial medical technology litigation. Amicably resolved.

Biedermann Technologies v. K2M
United States District Court • Eastern District of Virginia  (September 2022)

• Lead trial counsel in litigation against K2M, alleging that K2M's spinal systems infringed multiple patents related to pedicle screw systems and interbody implants. In September 2022, the jury returned a verdict awarding past royalties for Biedermann. The Court later ordered enhanced ongoing royalties for future infringing sales.

Stephen Burkhart, M.D. v. Arthrex, Inc.
Florida Circuit Court, 20th Judicial Circuit (ongoing)

• Lead counsel for Dr. Burkhart in commercial medical technology litigation.

Wright Medical Technology, Inc. v. Paragon 28, Inc.
United States District Court • District of Colorado (November 2022)

• Lead counsel for Paragon 28 in medical technology patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation litigation. Amicably resolved.

Personalized Media Communications, LLC. v. a leading computer, mobile device and media player company
United States District Court • Eastern District of Texas (March 2021)

• Counsel for leading computer and mobile device company in litigation against patent licensing company asserting infringement of patents related to digital rights management (DRM) and seeking close to $1 billion in royalties. Following a bench trial on the issue of patent prosecution laches, the court found the asserted patents unenforceable. Affirmed on appeal.

C&M Investment Group, Ltd. v. MLG Automotive Law, et al.
Los Angeles County Superior Court (May 2019)

• Represented C&M Investment Group, Ltd. and Karlin Holdings, entities owned by Dr. Gary Michelson, in litigation stemming from interference with C&M's efforts to collect on a $24 million judgment for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and civil racketeering. Following a week-long jury trial, Kirkland secured jury verdicts of $2.5 million for the clients.

Orthopaedic Hospital v. DePuy Orthopaedics
United States District Court • Northern District of Indiana (2018)

• Represented Orthopaedic Hospital in medical technology patent litigation against J&J subsidiary. Case settled on favorable terms prior to trial.

Hill-Rom Services, Inc. v. Matal
United States Court of Appeals • Federal Circuit (December 2017)

• Successfully argued appeal on behalf of Hill-Rom before the Federal Circuit and obtained reversal of Patent Trial and Appeal Board determinations.  

Silimed Industria de Implantes Ltda. v. Sientra, Inc.
United States District Court • Southern District of New York

• Lead trial counsel for breast implant manufacturer Sientra in connection with alleged theft of trade secret.

Eli Lilly and Co. v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. et al.
United States District Court • Eastern District of Virginia

• Trial counsel for Teva Pharmaceuticals in ANDA case.

In re Cipro
San Diego County Superior Court (April 2017)

• Counsel for Teva Pharmaceutical Industries in defense of consumer class action alleging antitrust violations associated with settlement of generic challenge to Cipro patent.  Case settled immediately prior to trial.

Cascades Computer Innovation, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Northern District of Illinois (September 2015)

• Lead trial counsel in retrial of previous favorable verdict for defendant Samsung Electronics in patent infringement action. Jury verdict of non-infringement again in favor of Samsung.
• Case featured in Law360, “2nd Jury Clears Samsung In ‘Original Patent Troll’ Suit,” (September 21, 2015).

United States District Court • Northern District of Illinois (July 2015)

• Lead trial counsel for defendant Samsung Electronics in patent infringement action. Jury verdict of non-infringement in favor of Samsung.
• Case featured in Law360, “Jury Clears Samsung In Suit By ‘Original Patent Troll’ Suit,” (July 22, 2015); Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, “Samsung fends off patent suit,” (July 28, 2015); Litigation Daily, “To Nail Your Closing Argument, Follow this Kirkland Partner’s Guide,” (July 28, 2015).

USSI v. Robert Bosch et al. (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Eastern District of Michigan (July 2015)

• Counsel for Brose North America and Brose Fahrzeugteile GmbH & Co. KG Hallstadt in patent infringement action.

• Prevailed in two inter partes review proceedings before Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. The board found that all 12 challenged claims, across two patents, were unpatentable.

Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc., et al. (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Southern District of Florida (October 2014)

• As counsel to Medtronic, prevailed on summary judgment of non-infringement.

Frey v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. (breach of contract)
United States District Court • District of Colorado (August 2014)

• Lead trial counsel to Medtronic in a jury trial that settled favorably during trial.

HiTherm, LLC and Aniqu Sufi v. Steven G. Keener, et al. (trade secret)
Los Angeles County Superior Court (November 2013)

• Counsel to Boeing and an employee in connection with an action for misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of contract; case ended with court assessing costs to defendants upon Plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal of case.

Wi-Lan Inc. v. A leading computer, mobile device and media player company
United States District Court • Eastern District of Texas (October 2013)

• As trial counsel for a computer, mobile device and media player company, obtained a complete defense victory. Wi-LAN sought $250 million in damages from the computer, mobile device and media player company and enhancement based on alleged willfulness. After a one-week trial, a jury returned a verdict of no infringement and found Wi-LAN’s patent invalid after less than 2 hours of deliberations.

In re Lutz Biedermann and Jurgen Harms (appeal)
United States Court of Appeals • Federal Circuit (October 2013)

• Successfully argued appeal of a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirming the rejection of claims in a patent application relating to a bone screw. A three-judge appellate panel rejected the government’s argument and remanded the matter for further proceedings.
• Case was listed in Law360, “Fed. Circ. Revives Bone Screw Patent Claim,” October 2013; IPO Daily News, “USPTO’s Use of Additional Reference in Patent Appeal: A New Ground of Rejection,” and other publications.

Medtronic v. NuVasive (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Southern District of California (September 2011)

• As lead trial counsel, won $101.2 million for Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. (a Medtronic entity) in the first phase of a patent infringement dispute with NuVasive, Inc. The jury found that NuVasive’s spinal technology infringed all three of Warsaw’s asserted patents.
• Case was listed in Los Angeles Daily Journal “Jury Awards $101 million to medical device maker in patent case” (September 23, 2011); AmLaw Litigation Daily “Kirkland, Dewey Win $101 Million Jury Verdict for Medtronic in Spinal Implant Patent Case” (September 20, 2011); Law360 “Jury Hands Medtronic $101M in Spine Device IP Fight” (September 20, 2011); Bloomberg News “Medtronic Wins $101 Million Award from NuVasive Over Spine Device Patents” (September 20, 2011).

Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Southern District of California (July 2011)

• As lead trial counsel for Alcatel-Lucent, won $70 million patent infringement jury verdict in the retrial of a long-running patent infringement dispute with Microsoft.
• Case was listed in AmLaw Litigation Daily “Kirkland Wins $70 Million Patent Verdict for Alcatel in Retrial Against Microsoft” (August 1, 2011); Los Angeles Daily Journal “Microsoft Loses Patent Fight to Alcatel-Lucent” (August 1, 2011); Bloomberg News “Microsoft Must Pay Alcatel $70 Million in Patent Damages, U.S. Jury Says” (July 29, 2011).

Ericsson Inc. v. D-LINK Systems, Inc. (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Eastern District of Texas (June 2013)

• Trial counsel for Intel Corporation.

CooperSurgical, Inc. v. Teleflex (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Southern District of New York (October 2013)

• Lead counsel for Teleflex Corporation in medical technology case.
• Case resolved following successful defense of preliminary injunction motion.

Finjan, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc. (patent litigation)
United States District Court of Delaware (November 2012)

• Represented McAfee, Inc. as lead trial counsel in patent litigation brought by Finjan, Inc. against McAfee, Symantec, Sophos and Websense.

Stryker v. Biedermann Motech GmbH (patent litigation)
United States District Court • District of Columbia (November 2010, affirmed on appeal January 2012)

• As lead trial counsel for Biedermann Motech, successfully defended company in 2010 bench trial on 35 U.S.C. Section 146 appeal of USPTO interference ruling.

Biedermann Motech GmbH v. Alphatec (patent litigation)
United States District Court • District of Massachusetts (May 2008)

• As lead counsel for Biedermann, argued and won Markman hearing and summary judgment motions; case settled in May of 2008 for a sum in excess of $10 million. The settlement was reported in Bloomberg News.

Teledyne Technologies Inc. v. Honeywell International (patent litigation)
United States District Court • Central District of California (April 2008)

• Lead counsel in the defense of Honeywell in a patent infringement case involving avionics technology that settled favorably following Markman hearing.

Biedermann Motech GmbH v. Medtronic (patent litigation)
United States District Court • District of Massachusetts (September 2007)

• As lead trial counsel for Biedermann, won patent infringement jury verdict in the amount of $226 million, second largest patent infringement award in 2007, and reportedly largest award in the history of Massachusetts.
• Case was listed in The American Lawyer “Young and Hungry” (January 2008); The American Lawyer “Big Suits” (December 2007); Bloomberg News “Medtronic Loses Bid to Void J&J $226 Million Verdict” (December 2007); IP Law360 “Judge Nails Medtronic with $226M Screw Judgment” (December 2007); Managing Intellectual Property “KSR Cited as Court Backs $226.3 Million Award” (December 2007).

Medtronic v. Michelson (patent/commercial litigation)
United States District Court • Western District of Tennessee (September 2004)

• Trial counsel to Dr. Michelson; won breach of contract/patent infringement jury trial ($170 million compensatory damages; $400 million punitive damages); settled for $1.35 billion in April 2005 (largest patent settlement in history).
• Case was listed in The American Lawyer “Winning Ways” (March 2005); “Big Suits” (December 2004) and Lawyers Weekly USA “Doctor Wins $560 Million for His Invention” (October 25, 2004).
• Verdict was cited in The Los Angeles Times “Jury Orders Medtronic to Pay Punitive Damages of $400 Million to L.A. Inventor” (October 13, 2004); settlement was cited in Los Angeles Business Journal “Doctor Billion” (May 2005).

Other Matters

• Admitted pro hac vice in a number of Inter Partes Review proceedings before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board
• Completed successful appeals in United States Court of Appeals for the Federal, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits
• Tried additional cases/expedited remedy proceedings in venues throughout the country
• Secured favorable settlements in patent, trademark and trade secret litigation pending in venues throughout the country

Luke began his jury trial career as a second-chair a few years out of law school defending Cleveland’s local railroad and utility company in FELA and personal injury type cases. These matters were in addition to large-scale antitrust and securities litigation cases on which he undertook more traditional work as an associate in a major law firm. He first-chaired his first case as a fourth-year associate in the defense of a utility company that conceded liability and faced a jury demand of roughly $1.5 million. Luke “won” when the jury returned a verdict of roughly $100,000. From that point on, Luke first-chaired many commercial and intellectual property cases, both on the defense and plaintiff’s side.

Among his cases while an attorney in Cleveland were the successful defense of the Shell Oil Company in a jury patent infringement trial in the Northern District of Ohio, the successful defense of Zapata Inc. in a jury patent infringement trial in the Southern District of Florida, a multi-million dollar jury verdict on behalf of the Cleveland Cliffs Iron Ore Mining Company in the Lake County District Court (at the time, the highest award in the court’s history), and an award on behalf of the Adams Construction Company in the Cleveland Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in which the jury, after asking the Court whether it was limited to what Luke asked for, awarded more than the requested relief.