CWM is a proven partner for high stakes patent and other intellectual property litigation in the Eastern District of Virginia, particularly the Norfolk Division.  Our reputation as effective co-counsel and local counsel is exemplified by our involvement in some of the most notable cases in recent years.  We team with firms across the country, including California, New York, Texas, and Washington, D.C.

Our attorneys have experience with every stage of the fast-paced litigation of the “Rocket Docket,”  including motions to transfer venue, motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, motions to stay pending IPR or CBM review, Markman hearings, motions for summary judgment, jury selection, jury trials, and post-trial disputes over interest, royalties, design-around efforts, and others.

In 2012, we were part of the successful trial team in one of the largest patent cases tried to jury verdict in the Norfolk Division.  In 2014, we were counsel to the successful movant in the first case in the country to be stayed following the PTAB’s application of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International from the U.S. Supreme Court.

In all of our engagements, we offer targeted, cost-effective representation, coupled with a reputation in the local federal courts earned over the last 90 years.

For more information, please feel free to contact us.  For information about our local counsel services, please see Local Counsel Representation.

Contact
Representative Cases

Elastec, Inc. v. Desmi, Inc., 2:15-cv-228, E.D.Va. (trademark infringement involving oil spill cleanup devices).

Virginia Innovation Sciences v. Samsung Electronics Co., et al., 2:12-cv-548, 2:13-cv-332, 2:14-cv-217, E.D.Va. (series of patent infringement cases accusing mobile devices).

Freight Tracking Technologies v. APM Terminals Virginia, Inc., et al., 2:13-cv-708, 2:14-cv-105, E.D.Va. (consolidated patent infringement cases accusing location technology).

Oasis Brands, Inc. v. Green Innovations Ltd., 2:13-cv-529, E.D.Va. (trademark case involving challenge to personal jurisdiction in Virginia).

Segin Systems, Inc. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co., et al., 2:13-cv-190, E.D.Va. (patent infringement case accusing account reconciliation software).

I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc., et al., 2:11-cv-512, E.D.Va. (patent infringement case accusing search engine advertising).

News and Updates
Virginia Federal court allows jury in trademark case even where demand came 5 months too late
Posted on January 28, 2016
In a Lanham Act case involving pharmaceutical products, Judge Conrad of the Western District of Virginia granted plaintiff’s motion for a jury trial, even though it was made only four......
Read More
Disappointed that PTAB declined inter partes patent review? Tough, EDVA Judge rules
Posted on January 28, 2016
The Patent and Trademark Board’s decision on whether to grant inter partes review cannot be challenged in court. In Medtronic, Inc. v. Lee, 1:15-cv-946 (E.D. Va. Jan. 21, 2016), after......
Read More
Court Orders Arbitration of Patent License Dispute
Posted on December 17, 2015
Virginia federal courts still err in favor of arbitration in business cases, even where parties take measures to avoid it. In University of Virginia Patent Foundation v. DynaVox, where......
Read More
Jury awards patent victory to I/P Engine in case against Google and others
Posted on November 1, 2012
A jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled in favor of I/P Engine in a patent infringement case against AOL, Google, IAC Search &......
Read More
Lawyer Search