Kathryn L. Clune, Partner Washington, D.C.
Phone: +1 202.624.2705
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20004-2595

Kathryn Clune is vice-chair of the firm's Intellectual Property Group and a member of the firm's Litigation and Trial Department, which was recently named Litigation Department of the Year by Washington Legal Times for general civil litigation. Kathryn focuses on patent, trademark and trade secrets litigation. Kathryn represents companies from the pre-suit investigation through the Markman, trial and appeal. Kathryn represents clients from a variety of industries, including telecommunications, digital imaging, electrical fittings, chemicals and consumer electronics. Kathryn also focuses on litigating "Section 337" cases at the U.S. International Trade Commission. Kathryn's patent litigation experience led her to being featured as one of the "Top 50 under 45" attorneys in IP Law & Business in May 2008.

Kathryn is also a seasoned appellate advocate, having argued numerous cases in federal appellate courts, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Prior to joining Crowell & Moring, Kathryn served as a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General's Corps, where she gained extensive trial experience. Kathryn was also a law clerk for Chief Judge Andrew S. Effron, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

Significant Representations  

  • Greenville Communications, LLC v. Verizon Wireless (D.N.J. 2012) (Fed. Cir. 2013): Won judgment of non-infringement for Sprint Nextel.  Non-Infringement Judgment was affirmed on appeal.
  • Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc. (M.D. Pa. 2013): Won contempt hearing on behalf of patentee in patent infringement action concerning electrical fittings. The court enjoined the competitors' new products, and awarded Arlington lost profits and attorney fees.
  • Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc. (M.D. Pa. 2009) (Fed. Cir. 2012): Won jury trial on behalf of plaintiff in patent infringement and breach of contract action concerning electrical fittings in September 2009. The judgment was affirmed on appeal two days after argument.
  • Certain Automotive GPS Navigation Systems, Components Thereof (337-TA-814): Represented respondent General Motors LLC in an investigation related to automobiles with in-dash GPS navigation systems. We successfully pressured the Complainant to terminate the investigation after six months of discovery.
  • Certain Communication Equipment (337-TA-817): Represented respondent Avaya in an investigation related to Power over Ethernet (PoE) features in telephones, switches, and wireless access points. Settled favorably.
  • Adjustable-Height Beds (337-TA-734): Represented complainant Invacare in an investigation related to adjustable hospital beds. Shortly before the hearing, the Respondents agreed to the exclusion of accused products from entry into the U.S.
  • Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc.,632 F.3d 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2011): Argued and won appeal on behalf of patentee obtaining the reversal of summary judgments of non-infringement on two patents based on district court's improper claim construction.
  • Semiconductor Integrated Circuits (337-TA-665): Represented Respondent LSI, Inc. against Complainant Qimonda AG in a case concerning the alleged infringement of 5 patents involving semiconductor integrated circuits. LSI obtained Final Determination of non-infringement on five patents and defeated the complainant's claim of domestic industry.
  • Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets (337-TA-543): Represented Intervenor Sprint Nextel Corp. in an investigation brought by Broadcom against QUALCOMM related to baseband processor chips used in wireless handsets before Judge Bullock. Lead counsel during the remedy phase, the Presidential Review Period, before IPR at Customs, and during the Enforcement Action. 
  • Kyocera Wireless Corp. et al., v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 545 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2008): Lead counsel for Sprint in landmark appeal of the limited exclusion order issued in the 543 Investigation. Obtained a stay of the LEO pending appeal and convinced the Federal Circuit that the statute governing the ITC, 19 U.S.C. § 1337, did not allow limited exclusion orders to reach beyond the parties actually named as respondents.    
  • In the Matter of Certain Laminated Floor Panels (337-TA-545): Represented 6 of 32 respondents in a 337 action concerning alleged infringement of 3 patents on laminated floor covering. Lead trial counsel at two week hearing.
  • Carlson et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 201 F. Supp.2d 78 (D.D.C. 2002): Obtained $7.8 million verdict in compensatory damages and $300 million in punitive damages on behalf of 10 former military members and spouses in suit against Iran under Anti-Terrorism Act for damages resulting from the 1985 Hijacking of TWA Flight 847.
  • As a Navy Lieutenant, successfully defended a Marine Aviator in an internationally publicized General Court-Martial. The client was charged with 20 counts of Involuntary Manslaughter arising from an aviation accident with a gondola cable in Northern Italy.

In The News
Kathryn was featured for making the "Top IP People Under 45" list in the May 2008 issue of IP Law & Business.

Awards & Recognition

  • Best Trial Advocate: New York City Trial Lawyers Association
  • Best Paper: NY State Bar Association, Committee on Legal Education & Admission to the Bar
  • Navy & Marine Corps Commendation Medal
  • Navy & Marine Corps Achievement Medal with Gold Star
  • National Defense Service Medal
  • Navy & Marine Corps Overseas Service Ribbon with Gold Star
  • NATO Medal


Admitted to practice: District of Columbia, New York, U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, U.S. Court of Federal Claims, American Intellectual Property Law Association, American Bar Association

Speeches & Presentations


Client Alerts & Newsletters

In the News

  • Fed. Cir. Won't Hear Appeal of Infringer's Injunction Contempt Until Sanctions Set
    July 17, 2014 — BNA

    This article covers the case Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings Inc., and notes "the key holding in the case is that Bridgeport Fittings appealed too soon after it was found in contempt of an injunction for patent infringement." Of particular note regarding the outcome of this matter, BNA reports that "the Federal Circuit doesn't have jurisdiction over contempt orders until sanctions are entered; Bosch applies to infringement cases only." Washington D.C. -based, Intellectual Property Group partner Kathryn L. Clune represented Arlington Industries in the case.

  • Fed. Circ. Axes Bridgeport Contempt Appeal Over Cable Patent
    July 17, 2014 — Intellectual Property Law360

    Law360 reports that "the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from Bridgeport Fittings Inc. over a lower court's finding that it had violated a settlement related to an electrical cable patent, ruling that the court did not have jurisdiction because the agreement hadn’t been modified. The three-judge appeals panel held that a lower court had merely interpreted, rather than modified, a 2004 agreement barring Bridgeport from producing electrical connectors that allegedly infringed on Arlington Industries Inc. when it entered a contempt order against the company in 2013." The case is Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings Inc. Washington D.C. -based, Intellectual Property Group partner Kathryn L. Clune represented Arlington Industries in the matter.

  • Seagate, LSI Trump Qimonda In ITC Chip Patent Spat
    February 1, 2010 — Intellectual Property Law360

    Earlier this year, the U.S. International Trade Commission determined that semiconductor integrated circuit chips imported by Seagate Technology LLC and Crowell & Moring client LSI Corp. do not infringe three Qimonda AG patents. The firm’s representation of LSI Corp. is featured in a Intellectual Property Law360 article highlighting the win. The ITC on January 28, 2010 decided to terminate its investigation with a finding of no violation, ending its review of a final initial determination by an administrative law judge that had found the companies did not violate Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Crowell & Moring’s team was led by Intellectual Property Group partner Kathryn L. Clune.

  • IP Law360: C&M IP Group Snags Jury Verdict of Willful Infringement in Bridgeport Patent Suit
    October 8, 2009 — IP Law 360

    On September 25, 2009, after a two week jury trial in the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg Division), an eight person jury unanimously found in favor of Arlington Industries, Inc. against Bridgeport Fitting, Inc., in a complex patent infringement case. The decision found Bridgeport infringed Arlington's patent (for the second time), that the infringement was willful, and that the products were colorable imitations of previously enjoined products, constituting a breach of the Settlement Agreement entered into by the parties in 2004. The defendant had also submitted to an injunction in 2004, which covered colorable imitations of the enjoined products. The jury awarded Arlington its entire lost profits demand for both infringement and breach of contract. The trial team included attorneys from three law firms representing Arlington Industries and Crowell & Moring’s Intellectual Property Group trial team included partner Kathryn L. Clune and associate Lucy Grace Noyola.
  • Katie Clune Recognized in IP Law & Business "Top IP People Under 45" List
    May 9, 2008 — IP Law & Business

    Crowell & Moring Intellectual Property Group partner Kathryn L. Clune is featured for making the "Top IP People Under 45" list in the May 2008 issue of IP Law & Business.

Firm News & Announcements

Jan.29.2013 Crowell & Moring Releases Report, "Litigation Forecast 2013"
May.27.2008 IP Law & Business Selects Kathryn L. Clune As "Top 50 Under 45" Intellectual Property Lawyer
Mar.01.2007 Crowell & Moring’s Intellectual Property Litigation Team Gains Experienced Trial Lawyer
Background image