In the last four years, Charlie has tried four patent infringement cases, including two district court jury trials and two ITC Section 337 investigations. He has also argued before the PTAB in an inter partes review proceeding.

Because litigation is just one of many tools for achieving business objectives, Charlie also counsels clients on licensing and litigation avoidance. Collectively, he has advised clients on worldwide IP licensing and settlement deals valued in excess of sixty million dollars.

Charlie is a registered patent attorney with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering and experience helping client apply for and obtain patents in the United States and abroad. Charlie is experienced in a variety of technical areas, including wireless communications, solid-state electronics, encryption systems, vehicular transmission systems, digital imaging systems, electronic measurement devices, lithium batteries, software applications and online business-to-business exchange systems.

Recognizing the importance of local pro bono efforts, Charlie is an active supporter of the Cabrini Green Legal Aid (CGLA) clinic in Chicago. Charlie serves on CGLA’s Advisory Board and contributes his time to serve CGLA clients.

Weniger anzeigen

• InterDigital v. US International Trade Commission (Fed. Cir. 2015); represented a named respondent from the underlying ITC investigation, resulting in a decision affirming the ITC’s finding that no valid patent claim was infringed
• Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-868, 2014); represented a manufacturer of wireless devices named as a respondent in this investigation, resulting in a finding of non-infringement
• McDavid v. NIKE (N.D. Ill. 2014); represented NIKE and an individual challenging inventorship in this patent infringement litigation involving athletic wear; the case was resolved on the eve of a trial on the inventorship claim
• Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-800, 2013); represented a manufacturer of wireless devices named as a respondent in this investigation, resulting in a finding of non-infringement
• AOL, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2009); represented Yahoo! as a declaratory judgment defendant and asserted patent infringement claims on behalf of Yahoo! against AOL; the dispute was resolved on favorable terms
• Lithium Battery Patent Enforcement (W.D. Wis. 2008); represented Energizer Holdings, Inc., and Eveready Battery Co. in this case involving two patents for advanced primary battery technology; the court granted a preliminary injunction to halt sales of the infringing batteries
• Eaton Corporation v. ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc. (E.D. Mich. 2008); represented defendants ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc., in this patent infringement action involving automated heavy-duty truck transmission technology; after a two-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict on all issues
• Certain Automated Mechanical Transmission Systems for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Trucks and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 503, 2005); represented respondents ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc., in this Section 337 patent infringement investigation at the International Trade Commission; in the violation phase of the investigation, the ITC granted respondents’ motion for summary determination with respect to one of the six asserted patents; the ITC also terminated the investigation, at the patent owner’s request, with respect to two other patents and several claims of the remaining three patents; after a ten-day hearing on the merits, the administrative law judge ruled in favor of the respondents on all but one claim of one patent; the respondents designed around the one remaining claim, and Charles helped them work with Customs and Border Protection to ensure continuous importation of the redesigned product; when the patent owner brought an enforcement action, Charles helped ZF and ArvinMeritor become the first respondents ever to defend successfully against such a proceeding at the ITC; as a result of this victory, ZF and ArvinMeritor were able to continue the importation and sale of the redesigned product without interruption

Weniger anzeigen

• IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners 2017 to 2023
• Illinois Super Lawyer 2008 to 2020
• Law Bulletin Publishing Company
• Leading Lawyers Network

Weniger anzeigen

• Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
• Cabrini Green Legal Aid (CGLA), advisory board

Weniger anzeigen

Clients turn to Marjorie for counsel on traditional labor matters, including collective bargaining, unfair labor practice charges, and union election proceedings. She regularly conducts trainings on compliance with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) for in-house counsel and human resources teams.

Marjorie also defends employers in state and federal class actions alleging discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, wage and hour violations, Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) violations, and Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) actions. Her impressive track record includes obtaining dismissal of several multimillion-dollar lawsuits filed against employers in multiple industries.

As the co-lead of the Employment Group’s technology and artificial intelligence (AI) practice, Marjorie is at the forefront of issues arising at the intersection of employment law and AI, helping clients mitigate legal risks associated with the use of generative AI technologies in the workplace. She counsels employers on the legal implications of using AI tools in workforce decisions, including hiring, payroll, timekeeping, and reductions in force.

Fluent in English and Spanish, Marjorie is acutely familiar with advising clients on Spanish-language workplace policies and interfacing with witnesses and parties in both languages throughout all stages of litigation.

Marjorie frequently presents on labor and employment labor law issues at US conferences, with a focus on the evolving intersection of technology, AI, and workplace law.

Weniger anzeigen

• Obtained the dismissal of NLRB unfair labor practice charges challenging return to office plans on behalf of a media company
• Successfully appealed and reversed an order denying request for arbitration at the Second District Court of Appeal of the California Courts of Appeal on behalf of a food services client
• Defeated class certification of a FCRA class action on behalf of a national client
• Secured federal and state dismissals of multimillion-dollar FCRA class actions on behalf of an international client
• Obtained the dismissal of a national class action alleging bias claims in connection with wage and hour policies on behalf of a large American multi-brand restaurant operator

Weniger anzeigen

• Mexican American Bar Foundation, Board of Trustees
• Neighbors Acting Together Helping All, board member
• California Minority Counsel Program, member, former ambassador
• Hispanic National Bar Association, member
• Mexican American Bar Association, member
• National Employment Lawyers Association, member
• Latina Lawyers Bar Association, member

Weniger anzeigen

Previously, Adam worked for several years for a top health care software vendor and participated in multiple large-scale hospital software implementations around the country. While in law school, he served as the articles editor of the Loyola Consumer Law Review.

Weniger anzeigen

• Advised a large Midwestern health system in connection with various state and federal change of ownership and name change filings related to a large-scale system rebranding and restructuring
• Assisted with a physician contracting compliance audit of a health system
• Assisted with the equity and debt restructuring and buyout of a proton center joint venture between a nonprofit health system and physicians

Weniger anzeigen

Jon also represents companies and individuals in connection with civil and criminal government investigations, including investigations by the US Department of Justice, the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General and local law enforcement agencies.

Jon previously served as a law clerk for the Honorable A. Andrew Hauk, Senior Judge and Chief Judge Emeritus, of the US District Court for the Central District of California. He also previously worked for the Honorable Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong of the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

Jon currently serves as an Adjunct Professor of Law at the USC Gould School of Law. He teaches a course on appellate and courtroom advocacy.

Weniger anzeigen

• Trial counsel for the defendant in connection with a trade secret misappropriation action that was successfully compelled to arbitration; on the day before trial, the plaintiff capitulated and the matter was successfully resolved for the Firm’s client (US District Court for the Northern District of California, US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, JAMS Arbitration (2019-2022))
• Trial counsel and lead appellate counsel for the defendant, a leading maker of office headsets, in a $600 million+ antitrust action between direct competitors; the jury deliberated for barely an hour before returning a complete defense verdict in favor of his client (US District Court for the District of Delaware (2017); Third Circuit Court of Appeals (2018-2019); US District Court for the District of Delaware (2019-2020))
• Trial counsel for the defendant, a smartphone manufacturer, in a patent infringement action involving wireless mobile phone technology and network infrastructure patents in which the court found four out of the five patents-in-suit invalid or not infringed on summary judgment; the matter proceeded to trial on the remaining patent and after less than a day of deliberations the jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of the Firm’s client (US District Court for the Northern District of Texas (2015-2016))
• Trial counsel for plaintiff, a manufacturer of application delivery controllers, in a highly contentious patent infringement action between direct competitors; after a trial lasting nearly a month, the jury found in favor of the Firm’s client, rejected defendant’s claims of invalidity and found the defendant liable for willful infringement; an injunction was entered against the defendant (US District Court for the Northern District of California (2015-2016))
• Trial counsel for a fabless chip designer in a trade secret misappropriation, patent inventorship, trademark and breach of contract action involving dual in-line memory modules; after less than two days of deliberations, the jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of the Firm’s client on all eight trade secret claims, the two breach of contract claims and the patent inventorship claim, and awarded plaintiff a mere $2 in nominal damages on the two trademark claims (US District Court for the Northern District of California (2015))
• Trial counsel for a smartphone manufacturer in a patent infringement action involving wireless mobile phone technology; after deliberating for less than four hours, the jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of the Firm’s client on both patent infringement and invalidity (US District Court for the Middle District of Florida (2014))
• Trial counsel on behalf of a smartphone manufacturer in a patent infringement action filed by a Mauritian non-practicing entity that claimed to have lawful ownership of the patents-in-suit through a trust set up by a major Taiwanese technology company; the Firm’s client contended that all of the patents-in-suit were not infringed and that the plaintiff had no standing to proceed with the lawsuit under US and Taiwanese trust laws; during the third week of trial, just before closing arguments, the plaintiff dismissed the case in its entirety and the matter was successfully resolved for the Firm’s client (US District Court for the Northern District of Texas (2012-2013))
• Trial counsel for a major automotive parts distributor in connection with a felony criminal complaint asserting alleged willful violations of OSHA regulations; after a preliminary hearing spanning multiple weeks, which included testimony from nearly a dozen fact and expert witnesses, all criminal charges against the Firm’s client were dismissed in their entirety in what was the first known court-ordered dismissal of criminal OSHA charges at the preliminary hearing stage by a judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County (2012))
• Trial counsel for a major hospital system in a qui tam action involving 19 separate allegations of Medicare fraud and abuse, as well as claims of unlawful retaliation; shortly before trial, the matter was resolved with the dismissal of all claims and a confidential settlement solely related to the non-fraud based retaliation claims (US District Court for the District of Idaho (2010-2011))
• Trial counsel for a major marketing and distribution company in a successfully decertified class action case involving allegations of consumer fraud and violations of the California labor code; in the third week of trial, during Jon’s cross-examination of one of the lead plaintiffs, the 15 named plaintiffs dismissed their case in its entirety and received no award of damages (California Superior Court, Riverside County (2009))
• Trial counsel for the co-founder of a NASDAQ-traded broadband communications company on matters filed in federal and state courts involving alleged misdated stock options; after years of litigation in connection with the largest restatement issued to date relating to misdated options, Jon helped secure the historic dismissal of federal criminal charges (immediately after his client testified in a related criminal trial), the subsequent dismissal of a related SEC action and the successful resolution of related class action and shareholder derivative matters (US District Court for the Central District of California (2006-2011))
• Trial counsel on behalf of a NASDAQ company on a high-profile matter involving alleged breaches of founding partnership agreements and related employment contracts; after a trial lasting more than two months, the jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of his client (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County (2000))

Weniger anzeigen

• Winner of U.C. Berkeley’s James Patterson McBaine Moot Court Competition (former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia presiding), 1996

Weniger anzeigen