Jason focuses on the litigation of complex intellectual property disputes, with an emphasis on patent litigation. He represents clients in federal district courts nationwide, before the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC), and in post-grant proceedings at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
Jason represented and successfully argued on behalf of the petitioner in the first-ever inter partes review conducted at the USPTO under the America Invents Act (AIA). The National Law Journal recognized Jason for this accomplishment by naming him to its list of “IP Trailblazers and Pioneers.” Jason has also argued final oral argument in more than 10 inter partes reviews before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and he has served as counsel in more than 50 inter partes reviews, including as lead counsel.
Spanning a wide range of technologies, Jason’s experience includes software, microprocessors, navigation and GPS technology, automotive technologies, vehicle interfaces, electro-mechanical systems, telecommunications, liquid crystal displays, avionics, medical devices and diagnostics, consumer products and textiles, networking and internet technologies, health care information systems, medical informatics, console and online video games, and pharmaceuticals.
Jason’s practice is international in scope, having been involved in deposition practice in numerous countries and continents around the world. As a registered patent attorney before the USPTO, Jason has prepared and prosecuted domestic and international patent applications in the areas of computer software and telecommunications, as well as in the chemical, pharmaceutical, medical, and metallurgical arts. Jason also has counseled clients on infringement, validity and licensing issues.
Jason is experienced in all phases of litigating patent cases, including managing discovery, taking and defending fact and expert witness depositions, Markman procedure and hearings, motion practice and hearings, pre-trial proceedings, bench and jury trials, and appeals— including appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He also has experience in matters involving trademarks, copyrights, design patents, trade secrets, Hatch-Waxman and abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) litigation, unfair competition, tortious interference, antitrust and cyber law issues.
Jason was one of just nine attorneys in the country recognized by Law360 IP in its list of “2015 IP MVPs.” He is a frequently invited speaker and panelist on topics relating to PTAB post-grant proceedings and patent litigation.
Before practicing law, Jason worked as an engineer for Kimberly-Clark Corporation where he was involved in the design and manufacture of consumer products.
Representative MattersJason has represented the following exemplary clients:
Garmin in first-ever inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which resulted in a favorable claim construction ruling and all claims under review being held invalid.
Garmin in a Section 337 investigation before the USITC and parallel district court proceeding involving multiple patents relating to navigation technology, in which USITC found no violation.
Ford Motor Company and Mazda Motor of America Inc. in a patent infringement action relating to radio-frequency identification (RFID) fuel-dispensing technology, which resulted in a decisive victory during claim construction in which the court invalidated certain claims and construed others in a manner that required the patentee to stipulate to noninfringement.
Sprint in series of complex multi-patent infringement actions asserting Sprint’s voice-over-packet technology patent portfolio, resulting in the largest jury verdict in Kansas history at the time ($69.5 million), a post-Seagate finding of willfulness, and a subsequent settlement for $80 million.
Cerner Corporation in a declaratory judgment patent and trade secret case relating to health care information systems for remote monitoring of intensive care units, which, after a three-week trial, resulted in a jury finding the asserted patents not infringed and invalid, including a patent that had been reexamined twice by the USPTO.
Abbott Point of Care in multiple patent infringement actions relating to handheld point-of-care blood analyzer technology.
Sony Computer Entertainment America in patent infringement actions relating to online video gaming and voice-over-data technology.
Garmin in multiple patent infringement actions relating to GPS and navigation technology against its chief competitor, TomTom.
Ford Motor Company in patent case in the District of Delaware and related instituted IPRs involving torque sensors for four-wheel drive and all-wheel drive systems, which resulted in judgment of noninfringement, award of Rule 11 sanctions, and “exceptional case” attorney fee award for Ford under 35 U.S.C. 285.
Ford Motor Company in patent case accusing MyFord Touch instrument clusters and touch panels, in which Ford was granted summary judgment of invalidity of all asserted claims on the eve of trial.
Sony Online Entertainment, Blizzard Entertainment, and Hasbro subsidiary Backflip Studios in multiple IPR proceedings relating to online gaming technology.
Ford Motor Company in patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas relating to hybrid vehicle battery charging systems and Ford’s MyKey system, which resulted in successful settlement.
Ford Motor Company in seven-patent case in the District of Delaware and related IPR proceedings involving liquid crystal display technology and light guide technology for vehicle tail lights, which resulted in complete dismissal by plaintiff.
Multiple avionics system and instrumentation suppliers in multiple patent litigations in the Northern District and Eastern District of Texas, which resulted in successful settlement for clients.
Garmin in a Section 337 investigation before the USITC involving patented microprocessor clocking technology in which the administrative law judge (ALJ) and full Commission awarded Garmin a final determination of noninfringement.
Ford Motor Company in four-patent case in the Eastern District of Texas and related covered business method (CBM) proceedings relating to online marketing technology.
Presentations and PublicationsSpeaker, Post-Grant Procedures – Where Do Things Stand for Patentees and Petitioners, AIPF Annual Conference, Boston, September 15, 2016.
Panelist, An Outside Perspective on Patent and Trademark Office Challenges, USPTO PTAB Stadium Tour, March 1, 2016.
Speaker, 101 Post-Alice: How the USPTO & Practitioners are Reacting, USPTO, July 23, 2015.
Presenter, Conducting Inter Partes Reviews: Reflections on IPR #1, Sixth Annual IP CLE, Lawyers Association of Kansas City, January 22, 2014.
Panelist, Inter Partes Review: A 6-Month Check-Up, Intellectual Property Owner’s Chat Channel, April 4, 2013.
Guest Lecturer, Patent Claim Construction, University of Missouri School of Law, April 1, 2013.
Speaker, Evolving the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and its Patent Law Jurisprudence, Missouri Law Review Symposium, February 25, 2011.
Presenter, Acts By Many, Infringement By None: A Discussion of Joint Infringement, CLE, March 22, 2011.
Author, To Construe or Not to Construe: At the Interface Between Claim Construction and Infringement in Patent Cases, 76 Mo. L. Rev. 709, 2011.