Ben routinely serves clients in the health care, manufacturing, construction, and energy industries. They trust Ben’s judgment and strategic management of litigation costs to pursue favorable outcomes efficiently. Ben believes the best lawsuit is one resolved quickly, but he has the experience and dedication to press through lengthy and challenging disputes to achieve his clients’ goals.
As an intellectual property litigation attorney, Ben protects his clients’ trade secrets, patents, and trademarks against exploitation by competitors, infringers, and departing employees. Ben also defends his clients against allegations of infringement or trade secret misappropriation. He has significant experience helping clients navigate the disputes over intellectual property that occur when a key employee departs or a partnership dissolves.
Ben’s expertise includes patent infringement and invalidity claims, contract interpretation matters, trade secrets and employee competition disputes, and health litigation. Ben routinely practices before federal and state courts in Minnesota and his home state of Montana.
Education & Admissions
Suffolk University Law School (J.D., 2011), summa cum laude, Law Faculty Outstanding Student Award, Daniel J. Fern Award, Academic Leadership Scholarship, Suffolk University Law Review
Boston University (B.A., 2008)
- New York
- United States Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
- U.S. District Court for the District of Montana
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
- U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Associate Justice Ellen A. Gorman, 2011-2012
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Associate Justice Donald G. Alexander, 2012-2013
- Solutran, Inc. v. Elavon, Inc., 931 F.3d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2019) – Defended Dorsey’s banking industry clients in two-week patent infringement jury trial and prevailed when patent was invalidated as directed to ineligible subject matter.
- Loenbro Inspection, LLC v. Sommerfield, No. 18-CV-01943-PAB, 2018 WL 3659396 (D. Colo. Aug. 2, 2018): The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado entered a temporary restraining order in favor of Dorsey’s client, a Montana-based oilfield services company. The order barred the company’s former employees from using its custom configurations for phased array ultrasonic testing equipment in violation of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act.
- Alston v. United Healthcare Servs., Inc., No. CV 17-81-BU-SEH, 2018 WL 1382514 (D. Mont. Mar. 19, 2018): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana dismissed all claims against Dorsey’s clients, a national health insurer and a pharmacy benefits manager, concluding that the plaintiff’s challenge to their Medicare Part D coverage determination was preempted and subject to administrative exhaustion.
- Drake Water Technologies, Inc. v. National-Oilwell Varco, L.P., No. 6:17-cv-38-SEH, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85062 (D. Mont. Jun. 2, 2017): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana enforced a forum-selection clause and transferred to Texas a lawsuit against Dorsey’s client, a worldwide service and equipment provider to the oil and gas industry.
- Montana AFL-CIO v. McCulloch, 380 P.3d 728 (Mont. 2016): The Montana Supreme Court rejected a pre-election constitutional challenge to a citizen ballot initiative championed by Dorsey’s client. The initiative sought funding for biomedical research on brain diseases, brain injuries, and mental illnesses.
- Techmanski v. Quanta Field Service, LLC, No. CV-15-97-M-DWM, 2015 WL 7005617 (D. Mont. Nov. 2, 2015): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana decided Dorsey’s client, a Colorado company, did not subject itself to suit in Montana by acquiescing to its employee’s decision to occasionally work from his home there. The court held it lacked personal jurisdiction and sent the case to Colorado.
- Barite Partners LLC v. Stefan, No. 27-CV-14-17267, 2015 WL 6776450 (Minn. Dist. Ct. Oct. 30, 2015): Dorsey’s client, a Montana company, avoided entanglement in a Minnesota lawsuit after Dorsey convinced the court that the company had insufficient ties to Minnesota to warrant the court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over it.
- Wyo–Ben, Inc. v. Bixby, 339 P.3d 1255 (Mont. 2014): The Montana Supreme Court, ruling on an issue of first impression, agreed with Dorsey’s client if a shareholder asserting dissenters’ rights under Montana’s version of the Model Business Corporation Act demonstrates a material and adverse change to his or her individual voting rights “in respect of” all the shares owned by that shareholder, the shareholder is entitled to redemption of all shares, not only those shares that were directly and adversely affected.
- Standard Register Co. v. Keala, No. 14-00291, 2014 WL 3420785 (D. Hawaii July 11, 2014): The U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii rejected an attempt to obtain a temporary restraining order against a Dorsey client based on allegations of trade secret misappropriation and tortious interference with business relationships. After considering Dorsey’s opposition, the court held that the plaintiffs’ likelihood of success was so low that it did not need to weigh other TRO factors before denying the plaintiffs’ request.
- In re Mission Critical Data Center: After a five-day trial, a civil jury returned a verdict in favor of Dorsey’s client, a national design-builder, on its claims that one of its subcontractors was negligent in providing electrical design services for the construction and expansion of a Tier III data center for a Fortune 50 company.
- Rocky Mountain Biologicals, Inc. v. Microbix Biosystems, Inc., 986 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (D. Mont. 2013): The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana awarded summary judgment for Dorsey client Irvine Scientific Sales Company on the plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference of contract. In addition to some favorable procedural rulings, the court found that Irvine’s good-faith assertions of its own contractual rights could not be tortious under Montana law.
News & Resources
News & Press Mentions
Events & Speaking Engagements
Industries & Practices
- Construction Litigation
- Electronic Discovery
- Energy & Natural Resources
- Indian & Alaska Native
- Intellectual Property Litigation
Professional & Civic
- Ben maintains an active pro bono practice and is an Accredited Attorney with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
- Member, American Intellectual Property Law Association
- Member, American Bar Association Forum on the Construction Industry
- Member, Federal Bar Association