Jim Ewing focuses his legal practice on intellectual property strategy, patent litigation and patent portfolio prosecution and management. Fields of technology in which he has direct and current experience include medical devices, electronic commerce, telecommunications and software technologies, carpet and textile products and equipment, and counseling and representation of technology-based start-up companies. Mr. Ewing is extensively involved in writing patents, prosecuting them, leveraging them, strategy, management and licensing in orthopedic implant structures and processes, surgical navigation systems, wound management products, information technology and wireless fields, including fiber optics, radio-frequency modulation and encoding, encryption, security and privacy-related systems and processes, wireless network systems and network theory. Mr. Ewing was named to the International Who's Who of Business Lawyers in 2009 and 2011 and International Who's Who of Patent Lawyers in 2009 and 2011. He was listed for Intellectual Property law The Best Lawyers in America® in 2012 and each of the 11 years immediately preceding. He was listed as #1 in the 2011 edition of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business and has been listed for each of the seven years immediately preceding in the area of Intellectual Property. In 2011, Mr. Ewing was recommended by Legal 500 US in the area of Patent Prosecution. He was also recognized as a Top 2011 Georgia "Super Lawyer" for Intellectual Property law by SuperLawyers magazine and is AV® rated by Martindale-Hubbell. Professional & Community Activities American Bar Association, Member American Intellectual Property Law Association, Member Atlanta Bar Association, Member Federalist Society's IP Subcommittee on Patents, Chair Patent Bar of the United States, Member Practicing Law Institute, Annual Program on Patent Litigation, Co-Chair State Bar of Georgia, Member Industries Health & Life Sciences; Technology & Software; Manufacturing; Telecommunications; Paper & Packaging; Medical & Surgical Devices Experience Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing LLP v. Cox Communications; In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation; Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing LLP v. EarthLink Inc., Lead counsel on behalf of Cox Communications and EarthLink in a suit filed by Ronald A. Katz Licensing Technology in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The suit claims patent infringement stemming from our clients' use of automated telephone processing systems. The action was consolidated for pre-trial proceedings with other suits brought by Katz against various other defendants in the Central District of California, with Judge Klausner presiding over discovery and other pre-trial matters.
Ronald A. Katz Tech. Licensing, LLP v. Cox Commc'ns, No. 07-2299 (E.D. Tex. filed April 6, 2007); In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., No. 07-01816 (E.D. Tex. filed July 7, 2008) and Ronald A. Katz Tech. Licensing, LLP v. EarthLink, Inc., No. 07-2235, No. 07-2299 (E.D. Tex. filed April 9, 2007); In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., No. 07-01816 (E.D. Tex. filed July 7, 2008). Patent litigation advice for international investment firm, Advised an international investment firm regarding cellular telephony litigation developments and predictions. Intellectual property counseling for Smith & Nephew, Provides patent procurement and counseling services to Smith & Nephew, an industry leader in the development of advanced medical devices and implants. The company offers technically innovative products in areas such as orthopedic reconstruction and trauma, endoscopy, advanced wound management and biologics. Provide counsel and advice in all aspects of the company's business, including helping shape its overall patent strategy. As part of this, the firm takes an active role in identifying and protecting innovations, as well as evaluating third-party intellectual property rights. Further, the firm provides counseling in connection with the company's patent licensing and acquisition activities and has represented the company in several patent infringement matters. Patent protection and licensing services for Equifax Inc., Represents Equifax Inc, one of the United States' largest credit reporting agencies, in their patent related matters by assisting in obtaining meaningful patent protection for software and web-related solutions that manage credit and other consumer data. The firm counsels Equifax on licensing, design arounds and third-party patent rights in a crowded technology area to understand the scope of those third-party rights. eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, Represented eBay, Inc., a Fortune 500 company, in clearing its design around and providing a non-infringement opinion after their Buy It Now feature was found to have infringed MercExchange's patent rights.
eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006). Biopolymer Engineering Inc. v. Immunocorp, The firm served as lead counsel for Biotec Pharmacon, ASA, a Norwegian pharmaceutical company, in patent infringement litigation initiated by patent owner Biothera, a Minnesota corporation, in the District of Minnesota in Minneapolis. The 14 patents involved in the litigation relate to, among other things, beta glucan compositions for immunotherapy. The District Court granted summary judgment of non-infringement as to 12 of the 14 patents, and the case subsequently settled.
Biopolymer Eng'g, Inc. v. Immunocorp, No. 05-00536 (D. Minn. filed Mar. 14, 2005). Multimillion dollar arbitration for a financial services corporation, Served as lead counsel and successfully defended a financial services corporation in a multimillion dollar arbitration concerning a dispute over an automated call processing services and whether its activities fell within the scope of a technology license. After implementing an aggressive trial strategy, the plaintiff agreed to enter into a new license for a fraction of what it claimed as damages in the arbitration. We also persuaded former shareholders of the company to pay a substantial part of the new license fee. 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc. v. NCR Corp., Represented 1-800-Flowers.com in matter where NCR asserted a patent infringement claim relating to e-commerce systems and web services. We filed a declaratory judgment action in the District of Delaware against NCR Corp. on behalf of 1-800-Flowers.com. The matter was resolved favorably to the client after initial investigation which generated valuable prior art and non-infringement positions.
1-800-Flowers.com Inc. v. NCR Corp., No. 03-297 (D.D.C. filed March 17, 2003). Patent litigation related to estimated arrival times for four major airlines, Successfully represented four major airlines in patent infringement case involving location and estimated time of arrival of vehicles. Although many of the defenses raised were common to all four clients, one airline had a unique system which was conducive to additional non-infringement defenses. We were able to successfully represent all four clients and provide them with the significant benefit of sharing costs associated with the defense. Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Howmedica Inc., Represented Smith & Nephew in several patent litigations in which our client asserted trauma orthopedic related patents against Stryker, which asserted reconstruction related orthopedic patent rights against Smith & Nephew. After intensive litigation in two courts, the parties settled with a cross licensing arrangement favorable to our client.
Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Howmedica Inc., No. 97-02811 (W.D. Tenn. filed Sept. 9, 1997). Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Synthes (U.S.A.), Represented Smith & Nephew in a patent infringement suit against Synthes Corp. in the Western District of Tennessee. After a three-week bench trial, the court found Smith & Nephew's patents to be valid and infringed. The court entered a permanent injunction in September 2006 enjoining Synthes from continuing to sell infringing bone repair devices. This is one the first permanent injunctions entered in a patent case after the Supreme Court's eBay opinion. After briefing and argument in the Federal Circuit, the parties reached a confidential settlement of the case.
Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Synthes (U.S.A.), 466 F. Supp.2d 978 (W.D. Tenn. 2006). Dotcast, Inc. v. Movie Gallery, Inc., et al., The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of Dotcast in a suit in the Northern District of Georgia to recover patent rights in the hands of a licensee who failed to make payments. After proceedings in District Court and in bankruptcy proceedings, a settlement favorable to Dotcast was facilitated, including recovery of the patent rights.
Dotcast, Inc. v. Movie Gallery, Inc., et al., No. 07-01181 (N.D. Ga. filed May 23, 2007). Patent procurement and counseling services to YKK Corporation of America, Provide patent procurement and counseling services to YKK Corporation of America, an industry leader in the development of fastening and architectural products, and energy efficient designs. The company offers technically innovative products such as zippers, hook and loop fastening systems, webbings, metal snaps and buttons, plastic buckles, and energy efficient window systems. The firm takes an active role in shaping the company's overall patent and trademark strategy, including identifying and protecting innovations, as well as evaluating and designing around third-party intellectual property rights. *Experience gained by attorney prior to joining Kilpatrick Townsend Publications 28 June 2010, Supreme Court Rejects Bright-Line Test For Patentable Subject Matter, Legal Alerts 19 October 2009, First Person: Win-Win Adoptions
Source: Daily Report, Articles 01 January 2009, Recent Developments Affecting Acquisition of Meaningful Patent Protection
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 01 January 2009, Patent Portfolio Creation and Management
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 20 November 2008, Patent Procurement: Rob Peter to Pay Paul?
Source: Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, Articles 13 December 2007, Intellectual Property Innovations Class: "Profiting from IP Assets in Today's Market", Podcasts 01 December 2007, US Patents Post KSR
Source: Patent World, Articles 18 September 2007, Intellectual Property Innovations Class: New Patent Rules: The Changing Landscape, Podcasts 01 January 2006, Patent Management Strategies for Companies with Smaller Portfolios
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 01 January 2006, Patent Due Diligence in Transactions
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 01 January 2006, Patent Opinions: What You Should Know to Increase Effectiveness and Reduce Expense
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 30 November 2004, Tips for Working with Expert Witnesses
Source: Intellectual Property Litigation - ABA section, Articles 15 July 2004, Antitrust & Intellectual Property Compendium
Source: Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, Articles 01 April 2004, Setting a Standard?
Source: Patent World, Articles 01 February 2004, Outside Influence: Recommendations from a Report by the US Antitrust Authorities
Source: Patent World, Articles 31 December 2003, Kilpatrick Stockton Attorneys Offer Insight into FTC's Report for Improving Patent System
Source: Competition Law Insight, Articles 27 August 2003, Federal Antitrust Enforcers Focus on Intellectual Property Abuses
Source: Intellectual Property Today, Articles 15 December 1999, Patents: Legitimate Property Rights or Grubstakes that Obstruct Progress and Commerce?
Source: Intellectual Property News, Articles 01 December 1999, Patent Litigation: Strategic Planning
Source: Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, Articles News 06 September 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Earns Record-Breaking Recognition in Annual Best Lawyers in America 2012, News Releases 22 June 2011, Twenty-Seven Kilpatrick Townsend Attorneys Named to 2011 International Who's Who of Business Lawyers, News Releases 15 June 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Recognized by Prestigious 2011 Legal 500 US, News Releases 13 June 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Again Earns Highest Recognition From CHAMBERS USA 2011, News Releases 29 March 2011, Photos of Kilpatrick Townsend Partners Giving Back to the Community at Recent Partners' Retreat, News Releases 02 March 2011, Kilpatrick Townsend Once Again Achieves Top Recognition in 2011 Georgia Super Lawyers, News Releases 24 September 2010, Twenty-Seven Kilpatrick Stockton Attorneys Named to 2010 International Who's Who of Business Lawyers, News Releases 12 August 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Earns Record-Breaking Recognition in Annual Best Lawyers in America 2011, News Releases 21 June 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Earns National Ranking from Chambers USA 2010 in Intellectual Property: Trademark, Copyright & Trade Secrets, News Releases 21 June 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Again Named Top Firm in Georgia for Intellectual Property by Chambers USA 2010, News Releases 15 June 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Recognized by Prestigious 2010 Legal 500 US, News Releases 14 June 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Again Earns Highest Recognition From CHAMBERS USA 2010, News Releases 04 March 2010, Kilpatrick Stockton Ranked Number One in Five 2010 Georgia Super Lawyer Categories, News Releases 04 August 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Earns Record-Breaking Recognition in Annual Best Lawyers in America 2010, News Releases 15 June 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Once Again Earns Highest Recognition From Chambers USA, News Releases 08 April 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Attorneys Named to 2009 International Who's Who of Business Lawyers, News Releases 02 March 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Ranked Number One in Five Georgia Super Lawyer Categories, News Releases Events 06 December 2007, IP Innovations Class: Profiting from IP Assets in Today's Market, Events 06 September 2007, IP Innovations Class: New Patent Rules: The Changing Landscape, Events (Also at Menlo Park, California Office) |