John Letchinger is Vice-Chair of Edwards Wildman's Intellectual Property Department. An accomplished trial attorney, John handles intellectual property and related commercial disputes, including patent, trade secret, trademark, and copyright infringement; breach of license, contract and restrictive covenant; and unfair competition, false advertising, electronic commerce and data security cases. Regularly representing industry-leading manufacturers, marketing companies and retailers, John has litigated a wide range of complex disputes and has taken many cases to trial and appeal. In addition to his significant trial experience, John is a respected counselor to his clients in complex and multifaceted intellectual property, contracting, business partnering and related matters. Notable Experience ˇ Lead representation of industry-leading retailers, manufacturers and marketing companies in a wide range of complex commercial and intellectual property disputes, marketing and advertising issues, and general business and contracting matters. ˇ National IP counsel to Fortune 500 retailer, including serving as lead counsel in over a dozen patent infringement cases and providing counsel on general IP and advertising, marketing and privacy issues. ˇ Lead representation of on-line travel company in complex commercial and intellectual property disputes and with ongoing transactional matters involving multi-party agreements. ˇ National IP and litigation counsel to prominent, national flooring and home improvement company. ˇ Lead representation of a major Energy Supply Company ("ESCO") in intellectual property and unfair competition disputes. ˇ Successful representation of RBM Consulting, a start-up voting equipment and services company, in an AAA arbitration involving breach of contract claims against Dominion Voting Systems. After a seven-day hearing, the Panel found in RBM's favor and awarded RBM approximately $5 million in lost commission damages. After Dominion challenged the Award, the Circuit Court of Cook County confirmed the arbitration Award and entered judgment in RBM's favor. ˇ Successful representation of Motorola Mobility in multiple patent infringement cases. ˇ Successful representation of A.J. Manufacturing Company, trying the invalidity and damages portion of a patent infringement case after the Court had entered summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on infringement. The jury did not invalidate the patent, but found in favor of A.J. on damages. ˇ Successful representation of TouchCom Technologies, Inc. in an intellectual property license dispute against Dresser, Inc. before a three-member AAA arbitration panel. After a week-long trial, the panel ruled in TouchCom's favor. The Award paved the way to a multi-million dollar settlement of TouchCom's pending patent infringement case against an industry-leading manufacturer of gasoline dispensing products. ˇ Successful prosecution of a trade secrets case involving the misappropriation of product concepts, which Learning Curve (the declaratory judgment plaintiff) wrongly patented and transformed into an industry-leading product. After nine years of litigation, including a jury verdict in the client's favor, the Seventh Circuit issued a precedent setting opinion, ruled in PlayWood's favor (reinstating a jury verdict that awarded an 8 percent royalty) and remanded the case for trial on punitive damages. The case soon settled on favorable terms for Playwood. Learning Curve Toys, Inc. v. PlayWood Toys, Inc., 342 F.3d 714 (7th Cir. 2003). ˇ Successful prosecution of a patent infringement case through trial and appeal on behalf of industry-leading Quickie Manufacturing Corporation, in which the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's infringement finding. In its Memorandum Opinion, the District Court specifically noted that Mr. Letchinger had repeatedly, seriously impeached Libman's primary witness, its Chief Executive Officer, and made a finding that the witness was not credible. Libman Company v. Quickie Manufacturing Corporation, 74 Fed. Appx. 900, 2003 WL 22025068 (Fed. Cir. 2003). ˇ Successful defense of Ondeo Nalco Company (declaratory judgment plaintiff), in a patent infringement case involving a chemical additive and method for manufacturing paper. After opening statements and during examination of Eka's first expert witness during jury trial, Ondeo Nalco moved for a mistrial, arguing that opposing counsel had improperly elicited testimony in violation of prior rulings by the court. The court granted Ondeo Nalco's request for a mistrial, and the case favorably settled shortly thereafter.Ondeo Nalco Company v. Eka Chemical, Inc., Case No. 01-537-SLR (D.C. Del.). ˇ Successful defense of Northfield Corporation in a patent infringement case through trial and appeal. The case was "bet-the-company" for Northfield, as it threatened its primary product-line. After a jury verdict of non-infringement in favor of Northfield, the case settled following oral argument before the Federal Circuit on Northfield's appeal of the District Court's denial of attorneys fees. Unique Coupons v. Northfield Corp., Case No. 99-C-7445 (N.D. Ill.). ˇ Representation of leading supplier of gifts and novelties in an unfair competition and breach of license dispute, including oral hearing on a motion for preliminary injunction. In combating the wide-range of defenses asserted by defendants, Mr. Letchinger was able to convince the District Court that advertising under the Lanham Act included oral statements made to attendees at trade shows. ˇ Representation of a leading consumer products manufacturer in multiple unfair competition, Lanham Act, and copyright cases against competitors involving product and product packaging claims and misrepresentations, colors, trademarks, and trade dress. The cases favorably settled, resulting in changes to defendants' products and packaging. ˇ Defense of Samsung Corporation in a patent infringement case filed against several leading manufacturers of cellular phones. The accused devices were cellular camera phones. After John was successful in moving the court to bifurcate damages and liability, Samsung was able to settle the case. ˇ Successful defense of copyright, trade secret, and breach of contract claims against a newly formed software company, which was comprised of several former employees of the plaintiff company, including the author and creator of plaintiff's competitive auditing software. In an attempt to exploit the limited resources of a nascent company, plaintiffs turned to litigation in an effort to put the new company out of business. On the eve of trial, the case settled following entry of summary judgment in favor of defendants on the copyright infringement claims. ˇ Defense of a leading manufacturer of animal litter in a patent infringement case. With the plaintiff having waited years to bring suit after first contacting our client, the defense developed compelling evidence of non infringement and invalidity, in addition to laches and estoppel. The case settled following the deposition of the inventor and defendant's submission of expert reports. ˇ Prosecution of copyright infringement action relating to the misappropriation and copying of technical drawings. While the case was on appeal to the Seventh Circuit following a protracted bench trial, the case settled of favorable terms. ˇ Successful defense of manufacturing client, Tensor Corporation in Rule to Show Cause proceedings. Tensor Corporation purchased out of bankruptcy the assets of Dev Corporation, which was forced out of business following the entry of an injunction against it in a case brought by Rockwell International. Rockwell later filed a Rule to Show Cause motion against Tensor, accusing it of violating the permanent injunction previously entered against Dev. After convincing the District Court twice to dismiss the proceedings on privity and timing grounds and following two appeals to the Seventh Circuit, the case settled before the Court ever heard argument on the merits. ˇ Lead representation in high-profile data security dispute regarding fraudulent credit card transactions, payment card industry standards and alleged security violations. Advising companies on all matters regarding compliance requirements, customer and media relations, cooperation with law enforcement agencies, forensic analysis of financial transactions, and proper determination of liability and source of security intrusions. ˇ Regularly serves as outside counsel for all intellectual property matters, for public and private corporations, including prosecution of patents, trademarks, and copyrights; maintenance of intellectual property portfolios; advertising and marketing clearance; and pre-litigation counseling, strategy, and clearance. Provides ongoing counsel to numerous clients in intellectual property due diligence matters and the creation and maintenance of outside inventor programs. Other Distinctions ˇ John has been recognized as a notable practitioner by Chambers and Partners. Clients noted that John is "an excellent listener who provides around-the-clock service...." ˇ In 2005, John was honored by Chicago Lawyer and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin in their "40 Under 40" list-a compilation of Illinois' finest young attorneys. Industries ˇ Technology ˇ Telecommunications ˇ Retail Industry & Consumer Products |