Mark Supko

Cases Before the U.S. International Trade Commission

• Representing PAX Labs in a Section 337 investigation involving vaping technology against several U.S. and foreign-based competitors. Following a trial, the ALJ issued an initial determination that PAX’s asserted patents were infringed and not invalid, and that PAX satisfied the domestic industry requirement. A final determination is pending.
• Represented respondent TCL in a Section 337 investigation involving video streaming technology initiated by DivX against leading manufacturers of “smart” TVs. When the lead respondents settled on the eve of trial, our team stepped in to try to the case. The case settled favorably shortly after the trial.
• Represented complainant Graco Children’s Products and its supplier, Wonderland Nurserygoods of Taiwan, in a multi-forum patent litigation against Baby Trend and three of its suppliers in China. Brought ITC action against Baby Trend’s U.S. imports of strollers and playards infringing four patents to Graco’s famous Pack ’n Play playards and Sit ‘n Stand strollers, with parallel actions in the Central District of California.
• Represented respondent General Motors in a Section 337 investigation seeking to exclude importation of vehicles equipped with in-dash navigation systems, successfully pressuring the complainant to terminate the investigation at the close of fact discovery.
• Represented complainant Invacare in an investigation involving importation of patented adjustable hospital beds, succeeding in obtaining a consent order excluding the accused products from entry into the United States. 

Cases in U.S. District Courts and State Court

• Representing Siemens Mobility in defense of a patent infringement suit brought by a competitor involving an improved train signaling system for the New York City Mass Transit Authority. After we filed IPR petitions against five originally asserted patents, the plaintiff disclaimed three of them and the PTAB invalidated nearly all claims of the other two patents. Those decisions are presently on appeal to the Federal Circuit.
• Representing plaintiff C3.AI in a trade secret misappropriation case against a former customer involving alleged misappropriation of trade secrets embodied in an artificial intelligence (AI) application designed to generate fuel economy recommendations for diesel engines.
• Represented Siemens Mobility in a wide-ranging, multiforum IP dispute involving Positive Train Control technology, including a jury trial win resulting in a finding of willful infringement and a $15 million damages award, and including defense of 15 IPR petitions before the USPTO. 
• Represented plaintiffs Bendix and Knorr-Bremse in a patent infringement trial against a main competitor involving air disk brakes for commercial vehicles, securing a jury verdict of willful infringement, a permanent injunction, compensatory and enhanced damages, and a multimillion dollar attorneys' fee award. 
• Defended BAE Systems in a trade secrets misappropriation action relating to the development of a next-generation light armored vehicle for the U.S. Army, successfully defeating claims for injunctive relief that could have threatened a $750 million development contract with the Army. 
• Represented plaintiff Curtiss-Wright Flow Control in a patent infringement action against a competitor involving industrial valves used to dehead coke drums during oil refining operations, securing grant of a preliminary injunction leading to a settlement that kept the competitor's accused valve out of the market. 

Cases Before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims

• Represented third-party BAE Systems in a Section 1498 patent infringement case filed by SAIC against the U.S. Army that claimed rapid target acquisition technology supplied by BAE and others infringed SAIC’s patents. The defendants succeeded in invalidating three of the four asserted patents during claim construction, and the case ultimately settled favorably before trial. 
• Represented third-party defendant BAE Systems in a patent infringement action filed against the United States involving laser-based missile countermeasure systems for the U.S. Army, resulting in a dismissal with prejudice after we invalidated the asserted patent through an IPR at the USPTO.

Federal Circuit Appeals

• Represented University of California scientists in related appeals arising from an inventorship dispute over patents covering blockbuster prostate cancer treatment drugs, resulting in affirmances of judgments entered by the district court following a bench trial in one case and grant of dismissal in the other. 
• Represented amicus General Motors in an appeal of a preliminary injunction against a supplier that threatened the supply of lithium ion batteries used in General Motors' electric vehicles, resulting in reversal of the injunction. 
• Represented Star Scientific in an appeal involving patents directed to an improved tobacco curing method. Following a bench trial, the district court entered judgment in favor of the defendant, finding the patents-in-suit unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. The Federal Circuit reversed, entering judgment in Star Scientific's favor on inequitable conduct.
• Represented leading supplier of prepaid gift cards in patent infringement appeal involving system for processing financial transactions after securing stipulated judgment of noninfringement below. Judgment of noninfringement was affirmed.