Home » Technology Expertise » Computers, Electronics & IT
Some of the most rapid technology advances today are taking place in computers and electronics, and intellectual property protection and enforcement can play a critical role in the commercial success of a new product. Effective protection of IP may provide a competitive advantage in the form of an additional barrier to entry by potential competitors or an important source of additional revenue through licensing opportunities.
The attorneys at W|N represent some of the world’s largest and most innovative companies in electronics, the Internet, computer hardware and software, semiconductors, and telecommunications. Several of our clients have received top recognition in their industry for the quality and depth of their IP portfolios in such areas.
For example, Microsoft, a W|N client since 1995, was recognized in 2009 by IEEE Spectrum, a publication of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, as the IP leader among all technology companies. Additionally, the Patent Board, a leading independent provider of patent metrics, ranked Microsoft’s patent portfolio number one in Technology Strength for the IT industry that same year. And just last year W|N was ranked 14th nationally in terms of the overall quality of patents issued for its clients, across all industries, by Intellectual Asset Management Magazine.
At W|N we have an impressive array of attorneys who are highly-skilled in electronics, computer hardware, software, information and Internet technologies and telecommunications. Our technical experience includes innovations in areas such as networking, cloud computing, high-speed communication systems and modems, electronic consumer devices, semiconductor devices, electro-mechanical systems, X-ray and radiology techniques, radar systems, satellite and satellite tracking systems, robotics and radar based traffic monitoring systems. Whatever your needs in this fast-paced area, we can help.
Stanford v. Roche BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY v. ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC., 563 U.S. _____ (2011)
In Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. v. St. Jude Medical, 576 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2009), the Federal Circuit held that liability does not extend to U.S. manufacturers of components made in the U.S. that are shipped abroad and then used in a process that would otherwise infringe a method claim of a U.S. patent. This en banc opinion reversed prior Federal Circuit precedent thereby harmonizing the Federal Circuit’s cases with the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 127 S.Ct. 1746 (2007).