Brad protects the intellectual property rights of companies with strategic portfolio development and litigation. He is a registered patent attorney with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and has litigated numerous cases through trial verdict—cases involving complex patented technology, design patents, trademark rights to protect market position, as well as false advertisement and unfair competition claims. Throughout his career, he has guided companies to minimize the risk of infringement liability, counseled on building assets for competitive strength, and advised on assessment of intellectual property assets for joint ventures, corporate acquisitions, and new product launches.
He serves as lead trial counsel in diverse intellectual property disputes before courts and administrative agencies throughout the country. These cases have involved numerous technologies, including digital signal processing, laser sintering, metal forming technology and finite element modeling of residual stress, paper physics, high-voltage transformers, air-flow physics, medical/surgical devices, beverage formulations and bank processing methods. Before practicing law, Brad worked in research at Rush St. Luke Medical Center’s Department of Immunology/Microbiology on research relating to the interaction of glycolipid compounds on growth hormone and cell proliferation. He also counsels clients regularly on designing and implementing tailored policies and procedures that minimize the risk of infringement liability and help avoid costly litigation, as well as policies for preservation of trade secrets.
Brad also has served as trial counsel in trademark counterfeiting cases, including obtaining a favorable jury verdict concerning commercial circuit breakers, and multiple cases related to trademarks for consumer products and trade dress rights. He has also served as lead counsel in cases concerning design patents and trade secret rights, such as cases involving employee departures and trade secrets associated with franchise agreements.
In addition to his extensive litigation practice, Brad also focuses heavily on guiding clients in development of a well-rounded and balanced portfolio of intellectual property rights, including managing complex patent prosecution efforts, negotiating and documenting intellectual property acquisitions, and providing analysis regarding validity and scope of intellectual property assets.
Brad excels at discovering creative ways to resolve avoidable disputes before they give rise to litigation. When litigation is unavoidable, and a dispute proceeds to trial, he has a fundamental aptitude for connecting with juries and presenting complex issues with clarity and persuasiveness, explaining sophisticated concepts in an understandable and captivating manner.
Utility Patent Cases:
Sociedad Espanola De Electromedicina Y Calidad, S.A. ("Sedecal") v. Blue Ridge X-Ray Co., Inc. and DRGEM(Korea), (Western District of North Carolina)
* Technology: High-Voltage Transformer for X-Ray Generator
- Lead Trial Counsel (jury trial), representing the plaintiff against multiple defendants. Prevailed at trial, obtaining a jury verdict of patent infringement, willfulness, and a substantial damage award.
- Served as Lead Appellate Counsel in an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, successfully reversing a summary judgment order of invalidity and non-infringement, resulting in remand for trial.
EOSGmbH - Electro Optical Systems v. Phenix Systems, and Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., (Northern District of Illinois)
* Technology: Laser Sintering - metal/laser sintering devices
- Served as First Chair counsel representing the defendants, a French company, in defense of alleged patent infringement relating to laser sintering equipment. resulted in continued business development in the United States by Phenix Systems and favorable settlement of the case.
Fort James Corp v. Solo Cup Company, (Eastern District of Wisconsin)
* Technology: Paper Physics and Tensile Stress
- Served as Trial Counsel (jury trial), representing the patent infringement defendant. Prevailed at trial, obtaining a jury verdict of non-infringement in the client’s favor, thus avoiding alleged liability in the excess of $100 million.
- Served as Lead Appellate Counsel and presented oral argument before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, to successfully argue for the client’s right to pursue a claim of inequitable conduct and seek attorney fees against the plaintiff.
- Federal Circuit Opinion is reported at: 412 F. 3d 1340 (2005).
In re: Circuit Breaker, (Central District of California)
* Products: Industrial Circuit Breakers
- Served as Trial Counsel for the plaintiff, Square D Corporation.
- Served as Trial Counsel (jury trial) for the plaintiff against multiple defendants. Prevailed at trial, obtaining a jury verdict of willful counterfeiting by defendants, and denying defendants’ claims of defamation and wrongful seizure.
Weber Stephen Products, (Northern District of Illinois)
* Products: Barbecue Grill Products
- Represented Weber as a trade dress owner relating to the famous Weber kettle grill shape. Achieved a favorable settlement against numerous infringers.
- Obtained ex parte seizure orders, executed with U.S. Marshall Service on the exhibit floor of a national trade show, the National Hardware Show, seizing all product literature, product samples and the business contact book from the defendant’s exhibition booth. Resulted in permanent injunction of product importation or sale.
- Obtained seizure of products through enforcement by U.S. Customs Service through interaction with Import Specialists of U.S. Customs, resulting in destruction of barbecue grill products imported from China that included Weber’s popular kettle grill shape.
Design Patent Cases:
Lakewood Engineering & Manufacturing Co v. Lasko Metal Products Inc., (Northern District of Illinois)
* Products: Portable Heaters/Fans
- Served as First Chair Trial Counsel (bench trial), asserting infringement of a design patent covering aspects of a portable fan product. Resulted in favorable alterations of the competitor’s product design, and the Trial Court awarded sanctions against the Defendant due to trial tactics.
Trade Secret (State Court):
Option Care, Inc. v. Oxycare I.V. Supplies, (Illinois State Court, Cook County)
* Pharmacy Operators
- Defended against allegations of trade secret misappropriation and violation of franchise agreement concerning operation of pharmacy services. Strategic repositioning of the case after being hired resulted in a favorable settlement with minimal cost, and dissolving the injunction on defendant’s business.
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Trial Bar)
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin