Practice Areas > Litigation

Trial strategy is our constant focus. Our trial lawyers have won multi-million dollar recoveries, obtained emergency injunctive relief, and successfully defended bet-the-company cases.

Patent 101

Our deep knowledge of patent and trademark law, technology and science enables us to deliver the results that advance our clients’ business goals. We have had equal experience and success in bringing trade secret and copyright matters to trial.

Our litigators have handled significant cases in courts throughout the United States and have achieved superior results by carefully tailoring litigation strategy to our clients’ business objectives and to the requirements of the case.

Litigation Results

Benchmark Technologies, Inc. v. Yuqiang (Richard) Tu and Kifonix Technology, LLC.

United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in firm client Benchmark Technologies’ favor and denied defendants’ motion seeking to overturn the favorable jury verdict and final judgment in Benchmark Technologies, Inc. v. Yuqiang (Richard) Tu and Kifonix Technology, LLC. The Court’s order affirmed an earlier judgement after a 5-jury trial in January 2023, that Benchmark's claims, including trade secret and unfair competition claims.

Benchmark, an international supplier of test reticles, photomasks, and related services for lithography systems, filed suit in February 2022, after its former senior applications engineer resigned to form a competing business and, among other misconduct, misappropriated five categories of trade secrets — valuable Benchmark intellectual property that gives the company a distinct competitive advantage in the market.

With quick action, Sunstein was able to swiftly shut down the defendants’ illegal activity on Benchmark’s behalf with a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, protecting vital portions of Benchmark’s business from irreparable harm.

#

Trade Secret Victory

KPM Analytics North America Corp. v. Blue Sun Scientific LLC et al.

United States District Court of Massachusetts

Following a rigorous two week trial concerning theft of trade secrets owned by KPM Analytics, a supplier of near-infrared analyzers used for spectrographic analysis, a federal jury found in favor of KPM, finding its competitor guilty of trade secret misappropriation, unfair and deceptive trade practices, and contract breaches. The jury initially awarded $3.4 million in damages, and those damages were later enhanced by the court to $6.7 million.

In KPM Analytics North America Corp. v. Blue Sun Scientific LLC et al., KPM sued Blue Sun Scientific LLC and its parent company, The Innovative Technologies Group & Co., in April 2021 for poaching key personnel, customer data and proprietary software. In August 2021, the United States District Court entered a preliminary injunction against both companies and four of KPM’s former employees now working at Blue Sun.

The jury found that Blue Sun unlawfully used KPM trade secret information and that it and the four former KPM employees stole trade secrets and violated non-disclosure agreements and good faith covenants. The four former employees and both companies were ordered to pay separate damages based on the severity of their wrongdoing.

#

Trade Secret Victory

Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC

United States District Court of Delaware

Sunstein obtained a sweeping jury verdict win in a patent infringement lawsuit for Ingenico Inc., a global provider of point of sale payment terminals, software, and services. Sunstein also filed multiple petitions for inter partes review (IPR), successfully invalidating over 150 of the patent claims in IOENGINE’s three asserted patents.

The exhaustive discovery process included tens of thousands of documents, 20-plus depositions (including multiple depositions of third parties in Israel), and significant third-party discovery. Notably, Sunstein challenged the methodology by which IOENGINE’s damages expert calculated reasonable royalty damages, prompting the court to exclude the expert’s testimony. After four days of testimony, the jury found that all claims were either not infringed or were invalid.

Meet Our Litigation Team

Sunstein Insights

Visual divider

Contact Sunstein

We are ready to speak with you about your legal service needs. For full biographies and contact information please see our Attorneys pages.

We use cookies to improve your site experience, distinguish you from other users and support the marketing of our services. These cookies may store your personal information. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device. For more information, please visit our Privacy Notice.

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Subscribe to: