Representative Patent Litigation
Mr. Vitt has acted as lead trial counsel in many patent cases:
- George Martin Co. v. Alliance Machine Systems International (N.D. Cal. and Fed. Cir.) (won judgment, affirmed by Federal Circuit, finding plaintiff's patent on machine used in cardboard manufacturing invalid after jury trial.)
- Emergis v. Otter Tail (D. Minn. and Fed. Cir.) (won summary judgment, affirmed by Federal Circuit, finding no infringement of plaintiff's patent concerning Internet payment system. This case was one of dozens that the plaintiff filed or threatened in a nationwide campaign targeting utility companies, and Dorsey's strategy led to the successful resolution of many other cases.)
- Emergis v. Great Lakes Energy Cooperative (W.D. Mich.) (represented electrical utility defending claims of infringement of patent concerning Internet payment systems; plaintiff agreed to dismiss after losing Otter Tail matter.)
- Emergis v. Middle Tennessee Electric Cooperative (M.D. Tenn.) (represented electrical utility defending claims of infringement of patent concerning Internet payment systems.)
- Emergis v. Midwest Energy, Inc. (D. Kansas ) (represented electrical utility defending claims of infringement of patent concerning Internet payment systems; achieved favorable early settlement.)
- Knopik v. Mobil Oil (D. Minn. and Fed. Cir.) (won summary judgment, affirmed by Federal Circuit, that Mobil did not infringe two patents relating to soil vapor extraction technology.)
- Cybersettle v. National Arbitration Forum (D.N.J. and Fed. Cir.) (after taking over case on appeal, obtained reversal from Federal Circuit of trial court's finding of patent infringement on patent concerning computerized dispute resolution procedure, and settled matter after appeal.)
- Pure Fishing, Inc. v. Normark Corporation (D. S.C.)(represent defendant in pending case alleging infringement of patent concerning manufacturing process for fishing line and patent concerning fishing lure composition)
- minSURG Int’l, Inc. v. Osteotech, Inc. et al. (M.D. Fla.)(represented medical device company defending claims of inducement and contributory infringement of medical method patent directed to bone grafting technique; defeated preliminary injunction motion)
- Wildlife Resources v. HME (D. Minn.) (won summary judgment for plaintiff of patent infringement for patent on hunting aid.)
- Keystone Retaining Wall Systems, Inc. v. Rockwood Retaining Walls, Inc. (D. Minn.) (represented Keystone asserting infringement of design patents on retaining walls; achieved favorable settlement after winning Markman and summary judgment motions.)
- Diomed v. Vascular Solutions, Inc. et al. (D. Mass. and Fed. Cir.) (represented Vascular Solutions defending claims of infringement of patent claiming method of laser vein treatment; case settled while on post-trial appeal.)
- AngioDynamics v. Vascular Solutions, Inc. (D. Del.) (represented Vascular Solutions in case concerning allegations of infringement of patent claiming method of using a laser fiber with a spacer to treat varicose veins; case settled after positive interim ruling in reexamination proceedings.)
- VNUS Medical Technologies v. Vascular Solutions, Inc. et al. (N.D. Ca.) (represented Vascular Solutions defending claims of infringement of patent concerning method of varicose vein treatment; case settled after Markman and summary judgment motions.)
- Shizzle Pop, LLC v. Aviva Sports, Inc. and Otter Tail Corp. (C.D. Cal.) (represented defendants in false marking case; obtained dismissal on motion.)
- North Texas Patent Group v. Automoblox and Manhattan Group, LLC (N.D. Tex.)(won dismissal of false marking claim)
- The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Brita Products Co. (D. Minn.) (represented Procter & Gamble asserting infringement of patent on water filter system; lost at trial but collected settlement due to "baseball arbitration" pretrial settlement after favorable Markman ruling.)
- Communications Systems, Inc. v. Bradley Kostelnik (D. Minn.) (represented Communications Systems, Inc.; won summary judgment of no infringement of defendant’s patent relating to technology for telephone and cable jacks.)
- Osteotech, Inc. v RTI (D. N.J.) (represented Osteotech asserting infringement of patent claims concerning method of preparing bone for transplantation; case settled before Markman ruling.)
- SL Technology, Inc. v. Smarte Carte Corp. (D. N. J.) (defended Smarte Carte against claims of infringing patent for biometric technology used for locker payment system; case settled favorably before Markman hearing.)
- Straumann v. Lifecore Biomedical, Inc. (D. Mass.) (defended patent infringement claims concerning dental implant products; case settled after Lifecore implemented redesigned product.)
- Turfco Manufacturing, Inc. v. Ty-Crop, Inc. (D. Minn.) (defended Ty-Crop against patent infringement claim involving hydraulic system for golf course equipment; achieved early, favorable settlement.)
- Ohio Medical Instrument Co., Inc. v. Image Guided Neurologics, Inc. (D. Minn.) (represented Image Guided Neurologics defending patent infringement allegations concerning medical device used in neurosurgery.)
- NetMoneyIn, Inc. v. eliance Corporation (D. Ariz.)(Represented eliance, defending claim for patent infringement of internet billing system.)
- Keystone Retaining Wall Systems, Inc. (represented Keystone in series of enforcement actions enforcing Keystone’s design and utility patents on retaining wall blocks and retaining wall block systems)
- Manhattan Toy (represented Manhattan Toy in series of enforcement actions enforcing design patent, trademark, and copyright rights.)
Other Representative Litigation
Mr. Vitt also represents clients in other intellectual property and business litigation. Representative cases include:
- Vascular Solutions, Inc. v. Marine Polymer (D. Mass.) (won $4.5 million jury verdict for plaintiff and defeated $40 million counterclaim in product disparagement and defamation case involving medical devices.)
- Straumann v. Lifecore (D. Mass.) (won summary judgment for defendant in trade dress lawsuit, securing defendant's right to continue selling its main dental implant product, and obtained substantial recovery of attorneys' fees.)
- Diomed v. Vascular Solutions (D. Mass.) (won summary judgment on trademark, unfair competition, and false advertising claims, and successfully settled remaining trade secret claim, in case involving endovenous laser therapy products.)
- PPG Industries Inc. v. Diametrics Medical, Inc. (D. Minn.) (represented Diametrics in trade secret, trade dress, and design patent lawsuit; achieved dismissal of trade dress and design patent claims before trial; after ten days of trial, Diametrics and PPG settled trade secret claims to clear the way for Diametrics' initial public offering. Acted as co-lead counsel and had primary responsibility for trade dress and design patent claims.)
- First Bank v. First Bank System (W.D. Iowa) (co-counsel in trial victory in trademark infringement case, affirmed on appeal, establishing First Bank System's right to use mark "First Bank" in Iowa.)
- Alliance Technical v. Alliance Machine Systems International (TTAB) (won trial before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, establishing Alliance Machine's right to its trademark ALLIANCE.)
- Manhattan Group, LLC v. Bang on the Door (TTAB) (represented Manhattan Group in trademark proceedings concerning disputed rights to trademarks used in Manhattan's famous GROOVY GIRLS line of products. Proceedings involved disputed rights in North America, Europe, and Asia.)