Inequitable Conduct – Unwinding The Tangled Web Of Deceit
Stephen Korniczky, Co-chair IP Practice Group
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton

May 29, 2014, 6-8:30 pm
This lecture will provide 1.0 California MCLE ethics credit

Del Mar Marriott
11966 El Camino Real, San Diego, CA 92130

Mr. Korniczky defended HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in a patent infringement action filed by non-practicing entity Intellect Wireless and its attorneys Niro Haller & Niro LLP. Intellect’s CEO, Daniel Henderson, was awarded 25 patents covering a wireless picture phone and other related technologies. Henderson reaped millions of dollars licensing this portfolio to companies such as Apple, LG, and Samsung. After a bifurcated bench trial, Judge Hart of the Northern District of Illinois held Intellect’s asserted patents unenforceable due to Henderson’s inequitable conduct before the PTO. Intellect Wireless, Inc. v. HTC Corp., 910 F. Supp. 2d 1056 (N.D. Ill. 2012). Subsequently, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion affirming the District Court’s decision. Intellect Wireless, Inc. v. HTC Corp., 732 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2013). HTC is now seeking reimbursement of attorney fees against Intellect Wireless and the Niro firm. Mr. Korniczky will address this case, and share his experiences and strategies during discovery, trial and appeal to demonstrate how Henderson’s wireless picture phone patents were rendered unenforceable. He will also explain the post-trial developments leading up to the motion for attorneys’ fees.