Martin Bader is a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm's San Diego/Del Mar office.

Areas of Practice

Mr. Bader is an intellectual property attorney and focuses his practice on patent and intellectual property litigation. He has represented numerous high technology clients in multi-patent litigation matters in the District Courts throughout the United States. He has an Electrical Engineering degree and has litigated patent cases involving many diverse technologies, including wireless communications, CDMA, WCDMA, HSPA, Wi-Fi, USB modems, LTE, Video and Audio compression, CDMA2000, wireless modems, Multi-media Messaging Service (MMS), Internet systems, web-browsers for wireless devices, software, liquid crystal displays (LCD), and televisions.

Mr. Bader is also a registered patent attorney and counsels clients on intellectual property protection strategies, prosecutes patent applications and trademark registrations before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), represents clients in patent reexaminations proceedings and trademarks oppositions before the USPTO, and conducts IP due diligence for corporate transactions and acquisitions. He has filed and prosecuted numerous patent applications for Fortune 100 companies and small start-ups in a wide variety of technology areas, including telecommunications, modems, video compression, LCD, analog and digital electronics, communications systems, network systems, GPS, computer software, Internet, radar systems, semiconductor, electro mechanical systems, mechanical systems, signal processing, and software.

Experience

Representative Patent Litigation Experience

Intellect Wireless v. HP/Palm: Represent Hewlett-Packard and Palm in a two patent lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois relating to sending pictures to a paging receiver. The accused technology is multimedia messaging service (MMS).

Wi-LAN v. Alcatel: Represents HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in a multi-patent lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas relating to 3G cellular technology, including HSDPA, HSUPA, and HSPA.

Honeywell v. Samsung SDI and Samsung Mobile Display: Represents Samsung SDI and Samsung Mobile Display in the District of Delaware. On summary judgment, our team invalidated the asserted patent relating to LCD modules based upon the on-sale bar after most of the industry licensed the patent-in-suit. The Federal Circuit affirmed invalidity of the patent and we are currently seeking reimbursement of attorneys' fees.

Wi-LAN v. HTC: Represents HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in a multi-patent lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas relating to Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Wi-Max and CDMA2000 (EVDO Rev. A) technologies.

Wi-LAN v. Apple: Represents HTC America, Inc. in a multi-patent lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas relating to Wi-Fi, HSPA, LTE and CDMA2000 (EVDO Rev. A) technologies.

Novatel Wireless v. Franklin Wireless: Represents Franklin Wireless, Inc. in a four patent lawsuit in the Southern District of California relating to wireless modems, USB modems, and Wi-Fi.

Golden Bridge v. HTC: Represents HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in a two patent lawsuit in the District of Delaware relating to WCDMA 3G technology.

Intellect Wireless v. HTC: Represents HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in a two patent lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois relating to sending pictures to a paging receiver. The accused technology is multimedia messaging service (MMS).

Wi-LAN v. PCD: Represented Personal Communication Devices, LLC (PCD) in a two patent lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas relating to Wi-Fi and CDMA2000 technologies. Resulted in extremely favorable settlement for PCD after filing three motions for summary judgment on PCD's behalf.

UO! IP of Delaware v. HTC: Represented Defendant, HTC, in a two patent lawsuit in Delaware relating to language translation devices. Successfully negotiated an early license on extremely favorable terms.

Datascape, Inc. v. Kyocera Wireless: Represented Defendant, Kyocera, in a six patent infringement action in the Northern District of Georgia. The accused technology relates to data communications and Internet access in wireless devices.

Mediatek v. Sanyo: Represented Plaintiff, Mediatek, in a three patent lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas and obtained a favorable settlement valued at over $200 million by our client. The asserted patents related to integrated chipset solutions for conversion of television display signals, audio encoding, and compression of video and audio data in video cameras, DVD recorders and cellular phones.

Datascape, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson: Represented Defendant, Sony Ericsson, in a six patent infringement action in the Northern District of Georgia. The accused technology relates to data communications and Internet access in wireless devices.

Apcon v. MRV Communications: Represented Defendant, MRV Communications, a leading provider of telecommunications equipment. After Apcon threatened MRV's customers and sued MRV for patent infringement, we countersued with claims of patent misuse, inequitable conduct, and unfair competition. Within 10 months, Apcon surrendered its patent suit by agreeing to a no payment walk-away settlement and agreed to issue a press release stating that MRV's products do not infringe any Apcon patent and that MRV's customers can conduct business without fear of reprisal from Apcon.

Memberships

· American Intellectual Property Law Association

· San Diego Intellectual Property Law Association

· Federal Bar Association

· Wallace Inn of Court

Articles

· Strategic Use of Reexamination During Patent Litigation, BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, October 23, 2009.

· Section 315 Estoppel in Inter Partes Reexaminations, Bettcher Industries, Inc. v. Bunzl USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir., Oct. 3, 2011).

Intellectual Property Law Blog Articles

· " Belkin International, Inc. v. Kappos - A Cautionary Tale in the Intricate Arena of Inter Partes Reexamination," October 10, 2012

· "Federal Circuit Avoids Central Joint Infringement Question and Articulates New Standard For Inducement," September 20, 2012

· "Federal Circuit Declines to Adopt Test for Patent Eligibility Set Forth in CLS Bank," August 17, 2012

· " Calcar and Thorner: Attempting to Reconcile the Federal Circuit's Claim Construction Jurisprudence," July 23, 2012

· "CLS Bank: The patent eligibility of computerized trading platforms for exchanging obligations," July 18, 2012

· "Courts to play greater role moderating enhanced damages for willful patent infringement," July 3, 2012

· "Federal Circuit Extends ResQNet and Allows Discovery of Settlement Negotiations," April 20, 2012

Events

· PLI's Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2013, July 2013, A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing