Jacob K. Baron

Mr. Baron has represented high-tech companies in dozens of IP disputes involving computer hardware and software. He has represented numerous patent holders to obtain license fees as well as defend against claims brought by non-practicing entities (NPEs).

• Served aslead trial counsel for plaintiff against its chief competitor concerning the sale of direct part mark readers. After a six-day trial, the jury returned a verdict of infringement, validity and willfulness on all claims asserted. The jury also awarded the client the full amount of lost profits that it requested. After post-trial motions, the court issued a permanent injunction and granted the client its attorneys' fees.
• Represented the plaintiff/complainant in an action before the U.S. International Trade Commission seeking to stop the importation of articles containing the client's machine vision technology.
• Defended semiconductor manufacturer in patent case involving amplifier circuit technology; plaintiff settled for a token payment shortly after the claim construction hearing.
• Represented university plaintiff in a patent enforcement suit against an automobile navigation system manufacturer. The asserted patent covered the first functioning automobile navigation system ever created.
• Defended two dating website providers in multiple defendant litigation relating to online dating services. The cases settled for token payments.

Mr. Baron has represented wireless equipment manufacturers as well as all of the major wireless carriers in numerous suits relating to the 3G and 4G wireless telecommunications standards. He recently led a team that received a rare order for summary judgment of non-infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. 

• Defended two wireless carriers in a matter involving four patents relating to self-optimizing networks and navigation technology. The district court issued a summary judgment of non-infringement, resolving all claims against both clients. Currently representing one of the wireless carriers in a second matter brought by the same NPE.
• Represented wireless carriers against claims that former Siemens patents were essential to certain 3G and 4G wireless standards. The claims were dismissed on favorable terms following challenges to the asserted patents under Section 101.
• Defended wireless infrastructure manufacturer in a multidefendant, multipatent suit involving LTE base stations. The case was settled after a favorable claim construction ruling that invalidated most of the asserted claims.
• Obtained a settlement for an infrastructure manufacturer in a long-running series of actions brought by a well-known NPE. The cases involved accusations of patent infringement against 4G LTE wireless base stations.
• Represented equipment manufacturer and its customer in a patent dispute involving Private Branch Exchange (PBX) technology. 
• Defended three telecommunications networking companies against patent claims relating to VoIP technology. The case settled after the third day of trial for a fraction of the original demand.

• In a competitor versus competitor suit, represented owner of a patent covering the manufacture of firearms against its main competitor and rival. Following two restraining order motions, a favorable business resolution was negotiated.
• Representation of various branded drug companies in Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) litigation over several years of practicing almost exclusively in the pharmaceutical space.