• Segway® HT

    The core technology for self-balancing personal transporters, such as the famous Segway® HT Human Transporter, is protected by a portfolio of patents secured by Sunstein. Patented features make the Segway® HT intuitive to ride, control and steer.

  • Electric Motors

    Sunstein won, and defended on an appeal, a $25 million judgement for our client Comair Rotron, including a rare award of treble damages and attorney’s fees, based on the willfulness of the defendant’s infringement of a patent for technology that improves the operation and lowers the cost of manufacturing electric motors.

  • Pregnancy Test

    In federal court in San Diego, Sunstein won a judgement of validity and infringement of Abbott Laboratories’ patent for strip immunoassay technology technology used in pregnancy test kits.

  • Stirling Engine

    Stirling engines use externally applied heat to deliver clean, quiet power for a variety of applications. We have secured a portfolio of patents for New Power Concepts LLC that relate to mechanical components of Stirling cycle heat engines. One patent relates to the engine’s operating efficiency and durability, while significantly reducing size, complexity and cost.

Winning at IPRs

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Arendi S.A.R.L.

Samsung attacked our client’s patent in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Obviousness was asserted in view of three prior art references. We persuaded the PTAB through careful claim construction and proper analysis of the prior art that an element of the claims was not disclosed by the cited references. We thus prevented the inter partes review from even being instituted.

Motorola Mobility LLC, Google Inc., and Apple Inc. v. Arendi S.A.R.L.

Motorola, Google and Apple attacked the same patent as Samsung raising several additional grounds and prior art references. Our arguments on claim construction and prior art analysis carried the day. The inter partes review was not instituted, freeing our client’s patent for unfettered assertion in court.

Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC v. Arendi S.A.R.L.

In three petitions, attacks were launched against two additional patents owned by our client, Arendi. The parties asserted approximately fourteen different grounds on the basis of six primary references. Our Preliminary Response arguments eliminated ten grounds and three of the references. The inter partes reviews will go forward only on those that remain.

Spotlight on Patents

diagram1For our client Dr. Leslie Stern of Fall River, Massachusetts, we recently obtained US Patent No. 8,460,310, describing a medical device for use in minimally invasive spine surgery.

In the News

Our Latest Thinking

  • With its decision in Alice Corp., the Supreme Court persists with its ever-narrowing definition of patent-eligible subject matter. The lack of effective guidance on eligibility threatens to harm the patent system. More...
  • The Supreme Court protects TV broadcasters from Aereo’s attempted end-run around the copyright laws. Despite supplying individual antennae to its customers, Aereo is found to have made impermissible “public performance” of protected content. More...
  • The Supreme Court restores an old rule: Liability for inducing infringement of a patented method cannot be imposed unless a single actor performs all steps of the method. More...
  • The bar has been lowered for invalidating a patent on the basis of indefiniteness. The Supreme Court says a challenger must show only that the scope of the invention is not defined with “reasonable certainty.” More...
  • The FTC targets exclusive licenses in the pharmaceutical industry for antitrust scrutiny. A federal court upholds the agency’s power to do so. More...

Free Subscription

See more in Publications/News