S.Giri Pathmanaban

Giri's experience includes representing:

Cybersecurity

• Lead counsel for GoSecure in a patent infringement case (WDTX) and trade secret misappropriation case against its competitor, CrowdStrike. Semiconductors
• GlobalFoundries in securing a summary judgment of invalidity, marking a huge win in a case involving semiconductor design software

Computer Networking and Electronic Devices

• Amphenol in successfully arguing final hearings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that resulted in invalidating four patents asserted against the company
• A bank ATM maker against a competitor in the ITC 

Wireless Technology

• AX Wireless in obtaining successful settlements following highly favorable claim construction and venue rulings 
• Overhead Door, serving as the day-to-day partner, in:
  • A four-patent case that Chamberlain brought in the Eastern District of Texas, ending in a jury verdict for Overhead Door (Chamberlain v. Overhead Door)
  • A five-patent ITC case related to garage door openers against Chamberlain, in which the ITC found three patents valid and infringed (Overhead Door v. Chamberlain)

Internet Technologies

• Lead Counsel defending Amazon in a patent infringement case in EDTX related to cloud computing technologies (Edge Networking v. Amazon)
• Obtained a dismissal of all patent claims against Amazon.com in a dispute related to automated pricing technology. 
• Represented Amazon.com in a dispute related to automated pricing technology
• United Video Properties, Inc. v. Amazon.com (Fed. Cir.): Drafted brief and helped prepare for oral argument for Amazon, and helped secure affirmance of non-infringement by Federal Circuit
• OIP Technologies v. Amazon.com, Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Secured dismissal of a patent case against Amazon.com related to automated pricing for goods sold online. The court granted Latham's motion to dismiss all 62 patent claims for failure to claim patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The dismissal was affirmed on appeal

Cloud Storage

• Actifio in obtaining a highly favorable settlement in a patent and trade secret case brought against the company after the PTAB invalidated all the patents

Medical Devices and Healthcare

• Abbott in:
  • A worldwide war against its competitor, DexCom, related to continuous glucose monitoring devices. Cases settled favorably after favorable jury verdict and judgment of infringement
  • A patent infringement lawsuit brought by competitor ISS relating to a wireless heart monitoring device called CardioMEMs, in which the team successfully filed inter partes review petitions (IPRs) and forced ISS to dismiss its case voluntarily
  • Multiple cases relating to medical devices
  • A patent infringement lawsuit in the Central District of California in which Flexstent alleged that Abbott’s Xience stents, the best-selling drug-eluting stents on the market, infringed its patent; Abbott filed an IPR with the patent office seeking to invalidate the patent and the PTAB agreed. FlexStent appealed but the Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance — a total victory (FlexStent v. Abbott) 
• Edwards v. Abbott (C.D. Cal.) Defended Abbott in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by competitor, Edwards Lifesciences, in the US District Court for the Central District of California. Edwards alleged that Abbott’s MitraClip, the only FDA-approved transcatheter-based mitral repair device on the market, infringes three patents. MitraClip is one of Abbott’s flagship products, with sales exceeding over US$400 million a year. Abbott filed two IPRs, and in response, Edwards dropped all challenged claims, handing a huge victory to Abbott. Case settled on highly favorable terms
• Integrated Sensing Systems, Inc. v. Abbott (E.D. Mich) Defended Abbott in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by competitor relating to wireless heart monitoring device, called CardioMEMs. ISS alleged that CardioMEMs was a rip-off; successfully filed IPRs and forced ISS to dismiss its case voluntarily

Nutritional Sciences

• Monsanto, a global provider of agricultural products for farmers, in:
  • Multi-patent competitor cases against DuPont involving corn seed breeding technology
  • A 16-patent case in the Eastern District of Missouri relating to its seed development technology that enables the convergence of plant breeding and biotechnology that settled on favorable terms to Monsanto (Monsanto Company v. DuPont Pioneer)
  • A patent infringement case in the Southern District of Iowa relating to corn seed manufacturing technology that settled on highly favorable terms to the company