| Biography | Michael Turton concentrates his practice in intellectual property law, with a primary focus on patent litigation, intellectual property strategy and licensing, and patent portfolio management and prosecution. Fields of technology in which he has experience include computer hardware and software, computer security, telecommunications, computer networking, film and digital projection technologies, financial services item processing, fiber optic networks, Internet search and services, electronic commerce, semiconductor and integrated circuit technology, and electro-mechanical devices. Mr. Turton regularly assists companies with a variety of intellectual property matters, including establishing patent programs and committees, analyzing patents held by competitors, conducting freedom to practice analysis, providing written opinions, drafting patent applications and prosecution, and patent portfolio management. He has also advised on numerous merger and acquisition transactions involving intellectual property issues. Before joining the firm, Mr. Turton practiced with a Houston, Texas, intellectual property firm. Mr. Turton has been recognized as a 2009 Georgia "Rising Star" in Intellectual Property law by SuperLawyers magazine. He is AV® rated by Martindale-Hubbell. Professional & Community Activities Intellectual Property Owners Association, Licensing Committee Member American Intellectual Property Association, Member Wake Forest Law Review, Notes & Comments Editor (1994-1995) Industries Technology & Software Experience Patent prosecution and counseling services to Adobe Systems Incorporated, Provides patent procurement and counseling services to Adobe Systems Incorporated, one of the largest and most diversified software companies in the world. The company offers creative, business and mobile software and services used by creative professionals, knowledge workers, consumers, original equipment manufacturer (OEM) partners and computer programmers. Much of the firm's work has focused on the software and services used to create, manage, deliver and engage with compelling content and experiences across multiple operating systems, devices and media. The firm works closely with the key technical and business personnel to identify and protect innovations with patent protection to achieve the company's strategic corporate goals. The firm also counsels the company with respect to patent strategy. Patent litigation for one of the world's leading entertainment technology companies, The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of one of the world's leading entertainment technology companies in a patent litigation case involving the conversion of 2-D live action motion pictures to 3-D motion pictures. Case settled. Patent litigation for major North American bank, Represented a major North American bank in a suit alleging infringement of two patents relating to methods for authenticating information and parties in online banking transactions. The plaintiff has sued approximately 30 banks and financial institutions in the action and has filed companion cases against many of the defendants' third party vendors. Case settled. Patent prosecution and counseling for a wireless technology and services provider, Provides patent procurement and counseling services to a world-leading provider of wireless technology and services. The firm works with the company's technical personnel and in-house legal counsel to identify and strategically protect the company's innovations. Also, the firm has conducted a patent due diligence and clearance analysis. Verizon Services Corp. v. Cox Fibernet Va., Inc., Trial counsel on behalf of Cox Communications, which was accused of infringing a competitor's patents relating to voice over IP technology. We obtained a jury verdict of no patent infringement of six patents and invalidity of two patents. Affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
Verizon Servs. Corp. v. Cox Fibernet Va., Inc., No. 08-157 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 11, 2008). DataTreasury Corp. v. Wachovia Corp. and DataTreasury Corp. v. Wells Fargo & Co., Represented Wachovia Bank, Branch Banking & Trust Company, M&T Bank and Comerica Bank against DataTreasury in patent infringement suits in the Eastern District of Texas and other noteworthy patent litigation jurisdictions around the country. The patents at issue involved various technologies, including telecommunications, electronic payment and clearing systems, software, business methods, and electrical and mechanical devices. The plaintiff in these cases sued more than 40 defendants, including many leading banks and financial institutions. Cases settled. (Judge Folsom).
DataTreasury Corp. v. Wachovia Corp., et al., No. 2:05-cv-00293 (E.D. Tex. filed June 28, 2005) and DataTreasury Corp. v.Wells Fargo & Co., et al., No. 2:06-cv-00072 (E.D. Tex. filed Feb. 24, 2006). Innova Patent Licensing LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al., Defending Wells Fargo Bank against Innova Patent Licensing in a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue include information security technologies such as spam-blocking software. The plaintiff in this suit sued numerous defendants, including some of the largest banks in the country. (Judge Folsom).
Innova Patent Licensing, LLC v. 3Com Corp., et al., No. 2:10-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex filed July 20, 2010). Autoscribe Corp. and Pollin Patent Licensing LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. and Wells Fargo Financial Inc., Defending Wells Fargo Bank against Autoscribe, a financial services and payment processor company, in a patent infringement suit in the Southern District of Iowa. The bank's systems, services and processes at issue in this case include customer service and payment acceptance technologies.
Autoscribe Corp. and Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Financial, Inc., No. 4:10-CV-202. TecSec Inc. v. IBM Corp., et al., Represents Cisco in a patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Virginia. The plaintiff asserted 11 patents related to encryption and network hardware technology against Cisco and several other defendants. In connection with defending Cisco, we performed significant analysis on the network hardware at issue. The court stayed the case for all defendants except for IBM, which won summary judgment of noninfringement. The case is currently on appeal to the Federal Circuit.
TecSec, Inc. v. IBM Corp., et al., No. 1:10-cv-115 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 5, 2010). Patent licensing dispute for IMAX Corporation, The firm serves as lead counsel on behalf of IMAX Corporation in its patent licensing dispute against Three-Dimensional Media Group, Ltd. Arbitration via the International Centre of Dispute Resolution. Case pending. *Experience gained by attorney prior to joining Kilpatrick Townsend Publications 09 December 2010, Shades of Grayscale Federal Circuit Opines on Abstractness Post-Bilski, Legal Alerts 29 July 2010, USPTO Issues Interim Guidance To Examiners Post-Bilski, Legal Alerts 28 June 2010, Supreme Court Rejects Bright-Line Test For Patentable Subject Matter, Legal Alerts 01 January 2009, Patent Licensing Considerations in Light of Quanta and MedImmune
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 01 January 2009, Patent Portfolio Creation and Management
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications 01 January 2006, Intellectual Property Protection for Computer-Related Innovations
Source: Intellectual Property Desk Reference, Other Publications News 02 March 2009, Kilpatrick Stockton Attorneys Named 2009 Georgia "Rising Stars" by Georgia Super Lawyers, News Releases Events 01 August 2011, Patent Law Update, Events 15 July 2010, In re Bilski: Supreme Court Rejects Bright-Line Test for Patentable Subject Matter, Events |