Vanderbilt University, B.A., Order of the Coif, 1984
University of Toledo, J.D., cum laude, 1987
Dallas and American Bar Associations; State Bar of Texas (Past Chairman, Intellectual Property Litigation Section); DFW Patent Association.
Over the last 27 years, Mr. Kennedy has successfully represented clients in high profile patent, copyright infringement cases, high-tech patent infringement cases, copyright misuse, patent-antitrust, intellectual property transactions, FINRA arbitration and employment litigation matters. He has specific experience in litigating: Patent cases involving surveillance technology; Copyright cases in the fields of software litigation, architectural copyright cases, photography cases, trials involving the copyrights for paintings and other traditional artwork, a jury trial involving rights to a publication licensing agreement, on-going litigation involving screen writer and literary works; Patent infringement actions involving medical devices, lasers, semiconductors, photography equipment and chemical compounds; Patent antitrust actions involving Handgards and Walker Process claims; trademark opposition proceedings and assisted clients in general trademark registration; Trade secret representations including both transactional and litigation matters involving confidentiality agreements and nondisclosure agreements; Theft of trade secret cases; Right of publicity cases, including representing a popular recording artist and a talent model; Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) matters involving digital rights management, circumvention litigation measures, takedown notices, online liability limitation and Computer Maintenance Competition Act matters; Business Litigation cases shareholder disputes, FINRA arbitration cases, whistleblower litigation, SOX claims, legal malpractice cases, AAA arbitration matters. Mr. Kennedy represents a number of international, national and regional corporations in the development and execution of appropriate litigation strategies and IP transactions as well as FINRA broker dealers, SBIC entities, investment bankers, technology companies, startup operations, entrepreneurs, sole proprietorships, individuals, authors, painters and other artists.
American Bar Foundation; American Fallen Warriors Foundation.
3rd Eye Surveillance v. United States (Court of Federal Claims - ongoing)(patent infringement); 3rd Eye Surveillance v. e-Watch (E.D. Tex. - ongoing)(patent case); 3rd Eye v. Stealth (E.D. Tex. - 2014)(patent infringement); 3rd Eye Surveillance v.Cities of Frisco, Addison Irving, Austin, Fort Worth (E.D. Tex. - 2014)(patent infringement litigation); Karen Dillard's College Prep LP v. KD Studio (E.D. Tex. - 2014)(obtained jury finding of trademark infringement, willful infringement and permanent injunction); Commerce Street Capital v. Pate, (N.D. Tex - 2015)(represented plaintiff in dispute concerning investment banking contract); Mart v. Berkshire Hathaway, (N.D. of Indiana - 2012) (representing plaintiff against former employer and others alleging claims under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002); Francesca Collections Boutique, Inc. v. Francesca Molina, (D. Colorado - 2012) (Represented defendant in trademark infringement case and successfully protected client's common law rights to trademark); Donald Hugh Henley v. Dillards Department Stores, 46 F. Supp.2d 587 (N.D. Tex. 1999) (represented recording artist Don Henley in a right of publicity case and obtained summary judgment in favor of client); Clark v. Dillards Department Stores, (N.D. Tex. 2012)(representing model in right of publicity case - still pending); Spent v. Montana Silversmiths, et al (W.D. Tex. 2012)(represented artist in actions for copyright infringement against several silversmiths and obtained summary judgment against each defendant, resulting in favorable settlements); Mart v. ESPN et al (S.D. Cal. 2010) (represented artist in actions for copyright infringement against several international media companies and, after filing motions for summary judgment, obtained favorable settlements); ChemCal, Inc., et al v. Delta Water Technologies (N.D. Tex. 2011)(represented defendant in patent infringement case and successfully challenged patent validity which resulted in favorable settlement); Independent Capital Management, LLC v. Collins, 261 S.W.3d 792 (Dallas App. - 2009) (reversing a preliminary injunction); MGE UPS Systems, Inc. v. Titan Specialized Services, Inc., et. al., slip op., No. 3:04- 0231 (M.D.Tenn., December 8, 2006) (court awards contempt penalties of $27 Million for violation of injunction); MGE UPS Systems, Inc. v. Fakouri Electrical Engineering, Inc., 422 F. Supp.2nd. 724 (N.D. Tex. 2006) (opinion of Judge Means on summary judgment motions in copyright infringement case); Kirsch v. Uncle Julio's Corp. et. al., slip op., No. 3:02-CV-1583-K (N.D. Tex, 2003) (after obtaining defense verdict in architectural copyright infringement case, court awarded $737,000 in attorneys' fees and expenses to defendant); PMI Photomagic v. Foto Fantasy, 60 Fed.Appx. 319, 2003 WL 722181 (Fed.Cir. 2003) (representing PMI Photomagic in successful patent appeal); KIS, S.A. et. al. v. Foto Fantasy, Inc., et al., 204 F. Supp.2d 968 (N.D. Tex. 2001) (representing KIS, S.A.); Image Dynamics et. al. v. Foto Fantasy, Inc., et al., 240 F. Supp.2d 608 (N.D. Tex. 2002) (representing Image Dynamics); Service Asset Management Co. v. Hibernia Corp. 80 F.Supp.2d 626 (E.D. Tex. 2000) (representing Service Asset Management Company) 5; Hampton Hardware, Inc. v. Cotter & Co., Inc., 156 F.R.D. 630 (N.D. Tex. 1994); Texas Instruments Incorporated v. Cypress Semiconductor, et. al., 39 U.S.P.Q.2d 1481 (N.D. Tex.1995).
Disclaimer: No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. The testimonial or endorsement does not constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter. Any result that the endorsed lawyer or law firm may achieve on behalf of one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate that similar results can be obtained for other clients. Past success cannot be an assurance of future success because each case must be decided on its own merits. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Martindale-Hubbell® does not undertake to develop a Client Review Rating or Peer Review Rating for all firms and/or lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed as unfavorable. Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for and will not be liable for the content and accuracy of the individual Reviews and the aggregated Reviews.
Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com