Edward Quon's practice focuses on patent litigation.  Formerly associated with Manatt, Phelps & Phillips and Kenyon & Kenyon, he brings his extensive patent experience to our team. Ed's patent litigation and prosecution experience includes a broad range of technologies, including biotechnology, pharmaceutical processes and products, Internet and e-commerce, data storage, access, and synchronization, wired and wireless e-mail, wired and wireless networks, music recognition and downloads, encryption and copy protection, analog and digital signal processing, computer software, hardware, and peripherals, and other mechanical and electrical devices.

Representative Matters

(* indicates party representation)

• *Visto Corp. v. Microsoft (E.D. Tex.) — Patent infringement action pending against Microsoft in the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall/Texarkana). Visto holds a portfolio of patents directed to wireless messaging and e-mail, calendar and contact synchronization, including U.S. Patent No. 6,085,192, which recently emerged from reexamination. Microsoft recently announced Messaging and Security Feature Pack (MSFP) for Windows Mobile 5.0 and Service Pack 2 (SP2) for Microsoft Exchange Server 2003. Direct Push technology in MSFP and Exchange Server 2003 SP2 is designed to allow Exchange Server to send messages and other PIM information directly to Windows Mobile 5.0 devices over the air (OTA) through wireless accounts. The case settled for a confidential amount just before trial in March 2008.
• *Visto Corp. v. Research In Motion (E.D. Tex.) — Patent infringement action pending against RIM in the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall) involving the Visto patent portfolio. RIM is the provider of the Blackberry wireless messaging hardware and software.
• *Visto Corp. v. Motorola (formerly Good Technology, Inc.) (E.D. Tex.) — Patent infringement action pending in the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall) involving the Visto patent portfolio. Good is the provider of GoodLink wireless messaging software.
• *Visto Corp. v. Seven Networks, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) — Recently settled patent infringement action pending in the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall) involving the Visto patent portfolio. Seven is the provider of Sprint Business Connection software and Cingular Xpress Mail software. After a jury verdict of willful infringement in favor of Visto in April 2006 (19.75% royalty rate), the court doubled damages, awarded attorneys' fees and entered a stayed injunction. The case subsequently settled. As part of the settlement agreement, Seven acknowledged the validity and enforceability of Visto's patent portfolio and agreed to licensing terms.
• Foodie Partners v. *Jamba Juice Company (E.D. Tex.) — Defended Jamba Juice in patent infringement action alleging infringement of Foodie's system patent. The case settled for a confidential amount just before summary judgment against Foodie Partners in October 2008.
• CBS Interactive Inc. (formerly CNET Networks, Inc.) v. *Etilize, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Patent infringement action pending in the Northern District of California. CBS Interactive ("CBSi") asserted claims against Manatt client Etilize, Inc. for infringement of patents relating to methods and processes of compiling information about consumer products into catalogued databases for online merchants. Etilize denies all of CBSi's patent infringement allegations and asserts counterclaims for antitrust violations under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, unfair competition under Section 17200 of the California Business and Professions Code, intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, and for declarations of invalidity, unenforceability and noninfringement of CBSi's patents. The court granted summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Etilize on all but two of CBSi's patent claims.
• E-Data v. *Ticketmaster, *Fandango, et. al. (S.D.N.Y.) — Recently dismissed patent infringement action regarding the Freeny patent brought by E-Data (formerly Interactive Gift Express Inc). Inxight v. *Verity (N.D. Cal) — Member of trial team that won a jury trial in 2006 in the Federal Court in this contract/copyright infringement case involving two electronic search companies.
• *Visto Corp. v. Sproqit (N.D. Cal.) — Patent infringement action involving the Visto patent portfolio. The action was dismissed when Sproqit ceased operations.
• *AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. GlaxoSmithKline, p.l.c., et al. (C.D. Cal.) — Antitrust and patent misuse action pending in the Central District of California. AHF has asserted that GlaxoSmithKline improperly obtained monopoly power in the markets for several HIV medications, including AZT, and is using that power to price the medications beyond the reach of a large segment of the population.
• *Macrovision Corp. v. 321 Studios (S.D. N.Y.) — Patent infringement and Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) action against 321 Studios in the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). Macrovision obtained a preliminary injunction against the sale of 321 Studios' popular "DVD X Copy" DVD copying products. Paramount and other motion picture studios had previously received a similar injunction, but 321 Studios avoided those injunctions by removing so-called "ripper" decryption functionality. Macrovision's injunction went a step further, blocking the new DVD X Copy "RF" (Ripper Free) products, which were being sold by 321 Studios on-line with a link to a third party ripper. 321 Studios filed an interlocutory appeal of the preliminary injunction to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, challenging the constitutionality of the DMCA. However, while the appeal was pending, 321 Studios agreed to a settlement. Under the settlement, 321 Studios acknowledged the validity and enforceability of the Macrovision patents, as well as its infringement thereof and violation of the DMCA, and was permanently enjoined.
• *Macrovision Corp. v. Sima Corp. (S.D. N.Y.) — Patent infringement and DMCA action against Sima in the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). After the district court granted Macrovision's motion for a preliminary injunction against the sale of Sima's products based on Macrovision's claims for violation of the DMCA, Sima filed an interlocutory appeal and an emergency motion for a stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal with the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit denied Sima's motion for a stay in an order detailing the reasons why Sima's appeal was not likely to succeed on the merits. Sima agreed to a settlement shortly thereafter. As a part of the settlement, Sima acknowledged the validity of the Macrovision patents and was permanently enjoined.
• Kahn v. *WAGIC Inc. (N.D. N.Y./AAA San Francisco) — Concluded patent dispute in the Northern District of New York and the San Francisco office of the American Arbitration Association relating to patented tool accessories. WAGIC held an exclusive license on patented tool accessories. After the patent owner attempted unsuccessfully to renegotiate the license, the patent owner sued WAGIC for patent infringement in the Northern District of New York. WAGIC successfully obtained an order from the New York court compelling arbitration and staying Kahn's district court litigation. Mr. Quon successfully first-chaired an arbitration before the American Arbitration Association in San Francisco and obtained significant relief for WAGIC, including an injunction against the patent owner's sales of the patented items within WAGIC's exclusive distribution territory.