Holland & Hart's team of Intellectual Property trial lawyers focuses on developing strategies for enforcing and exploiting patent, trademark, copyright, trade dress, trade secret, domain names and other IP rights.

The group is supported by a wider team of patent and trademark prosecutors and IP transactional attorneys who are substantively devoted to IP law. Our team also includes attorneys who clerked in federal courts at the district court and appellate level, including the Federal Circuit.

Our IP attorneys assist clients with litigation and strategy on a national scope. Our litigators have appeared in 30+ U.S. District Courts and eight U.S. Circuit Appellate Courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. We also regularly represent clients before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), and the International Trade Commission. Working with hand-picked foreign law firms, we manage intellectual property litigation for our clients in countries throughout the world.

show more

IP Litigation Client Results

Representative Copyright Cases
  • Artists' Society Represented an artists' society for over 30 years in hundreds of successful cases filed to protect the copyrights of its members.

    Artwork Distributor (U.S. District Court, District of Utah). Copyright dispute regarding a painting. We represented the defendant. The case settled before trial favorable to our client.
     

Representative List of Contract Cases with Major Technology Issues
  • Medical Device (U.S. Dist. Ct., D. Colo.) Patent licensing dispute involving medical infusion pump patent and technology. The case was settled on very favorable terms for our client, Stryker Corporation.

    Medical Device (U.S. District Court, District of Utah). Represent defendants in a "theft of invention" and breach of confidential disclosure agreement relating to closed suction tracheal systems (for patents on ventilators). Case was tried in November, but no judgment has yet been entered by the court.
     

Representative List of Domain Name Cases
  • Internet Search Services (U.S. Dist. Ct. D. Colo. and D. Utah; U.S. Patent and Trademark Office). Represented Internet search services company and president, defendants in an action for trademark infringement, violation of the AntiCybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, and unfair competition, as well as in related inter partes proceeding regarding a claimed mark. Obtained jury verdict in favor of our clients on all claims and invalidating the plaintiff's claimed trademark rights. The United States Patent and Trademark Office proceeding is still pending.
     
Representative Patent Cases
  • Agricultural chemicals (U.S. Dist. Ct., E.D. Cal.). Represented the patent holder in a case involving a chemical composition used in fertilizers. The defendant asserted antitrust, contract and business tort counterclaims. After a six-week jury trial, our client prevailed on all counts.

    Airline (U.S. Dist. Ct., D. Minn.). Represent defendant in case in which the technology at issue relates to Advance Notification System for use in transportation and other applications.
     

Representative Software Performance Cases
  • Insurance Company (AAA Arbitration): Represented the claimant software user in a case involving breach of computer software performance standards and misrepresentation. Case ultimately settled on terms highly favorable to our client.

    Media Company (Arbitration). Represented the plaintiff/user in a computer software performance case. After a three week arbitration, the arbitrators issued an award in favor of our client.
     

Representative Trade Dress Cases
  • Automotive (U.S. District Court, District of Colorado). Represent after-market manufacturer of hot-street rod products in copyright, unfair competition, trade dress, and trademark infringement case. Successfully obtained dismissal of statutory damage claim. Case is currently pending.

    Cable Protector (Arbitration in Denver, Utah). Arbitrated trade dress dispute relating to cable protector product. Represented the plaintiff. The case settled before the arbitration.

Representative Trade Secret Cases
  • Atmel Corp. v. Vitesse Semiconductor Corp., 30 P.3d 789 (Dist. Ct., El Paso County, Colo. Ct. App.). Represented defendant Vitesse Semiconductor Corp. in misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of confidentiality agreement action involving former employees of plaintiff. Represented defendant through trial court proceedings and appellate proceedings.

    Building Products (Denver District Court). Defendant attempted to e-mail to herself our client's trade secret documents relating to their certification program. We obtained a temporary restraining order preventing the misappropriation and requiring return of any trade secret documents. The Court awarded our client its reasonable attorneys' fees under the Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
     

Representative Trademark Cases
  • Automotive (U.S. District Court, District of Colorado). Represent after-market manufacturer of hot-street rod products in copyright, unfair competition, trade dress, and trademark infringement case. Successfully obtained dismissal of statutory damage claim. Case is currently pending.

    AutoZone v. Tandy 174 F.Supp.2d 718, 726-33 (U.S. Dist. Ct., M.D. Tenn.). Represented the defendant RadioShack in a trademark infringement action. The trial court ruled in favor of our client and granted RadioShack's motion for summary judgment. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's decision in favor of our client.
     

IP Policing Firm of the Year: Acquisition International

Holland & Hart's Intellectual Property practice named "IP Policing Firm of the Year" by Acquisition International Magazine, 2014

Best Lawyers® Litigation - IP "Lawyer of the Year" 2018

Scott Havlick: Litigation - Intellectual Property, Boulder

DISCLAIMER

Unless you are a current client of Holland & Hart LLP, please do not send any confidential information by email. If you are not a current client and send an email to an individual at Holland & Hart LLP, you acknowledge that we have no obligation to maintain the confidentiality of any information you submit to us, unless we have already agreed to represent you or we later agree to do so. Thus, we may represent a party adverse to you, even if the information you submit to us could be used against you in a matter, and even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us.