[11/17 Webinar] U.S. Jurisdiction: A Guide to Doing Business in the U.S., Selling to U.S. Customers, and/or Contracting with U.S. Companies
[Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP / FRONTEO co-sponsored online seminar]
In this webinar, Gibson Dunn's Antitrust and Intellectual Property Litigation Partner, Jason Law, discusses US jurisdiction and discovery topics for companies based in Asia.
In today's world of cross-border transactions and global web presence, companies often wonder what actions are subject to U.S. jurisdiction and litigation.This webinar will address common questions and scenarios for companies based in Asia, such as: (1) entering into contracts and transactions with US companies; (2) selling products for purchase by US residents; (3) Advertising and information disclosure on websites accessible to US residents; (4) Subsidiary operations in the US;We also provide general and practical advice for assessing and minimizing U.S. jurisdictional risk.
◆Date: Thursday May 2022th 11 @ 17:10 ～ 30:11 (JST)
◆ Webinar type: Zoom Webinar
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Jason C. Law is a resident partner in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's Los Angeles office, specializing in intellectual property law, with a focus on patent and trade secret litigation, as well as antitrust and competition law. .He has successfully represented leading companies in a variety of industries including video games, semiconductors, military defense and pharmaceuticals.He has also handled significant patent infringement litigation in courts across the United States and the United States International Trade Commission.
A leading intellectual property attorney, Law has been named one of the Top Intellectual Property Attorneys by the Daily Journal.The Los Angeles Business Journal also named Lo on the 2017 Most Influential Intellectual Property Attorneys list and the Intellectual Property Law Momentum list for his work representing clients in the video game, technology, and semiconductor industries in intellectual property litigation. Selected for 2012.
Law also has experience representing clients in significant antitrust litigation.Successful clients in interim injunctions seeking billions of dollars in royalties; success in oral proceedings against claims under UCL and Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act; has led to successful legal proceedings against antitrust claims relating to legal and trade restraints.
Law graduated from Harvard Law School in 2001 with honors. She graduated from UCLA in 1998 with a BA in Political Science and a minor in Accounting.Prior to joining the firm, she served as a legal clerk for Judge Mariana R. Felzer of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Since 2015, he has been a Law Lecturer at the University of Southern California Gould Law School, lecturing on patent and intellectual property litigation.
Mr. Lo's recent accomplishments and representation include:
・Represented Netlist in a breach of contract dispute against Samsung Electronics, Inc. On behalf of Netlist, Samsung obtained summary judgment alleging that Netlist's valuable patents were left unlicensed because Samsung materially breached its contractual obligations and Netlist properly terminated the contract.It also obtained a Rule 37 sanction against Samsung after winning the case on the merits. (Netlist v. Samsung)
Represented SoundCloud in a trade secret dispute relating to a digital music service for DJs and obtained dismissal of all claims asserted by SoundCloud (Beatport v. SoundCloud)
Represented four Taiwan-based consumer electronics manufacturers (Foxconn, Pegatron, Compal, and Wistron) in multi-billion dollar lawsuits alleging patent claims against antitrust, breach of contract, FRAND, and wireless technology licensors. .Preliminary injunction (Qualcomm lawsuit) seeking to force them to pay billions in royalties under patent license agreements challenged as anti-competitive and violating FRAND.
Represented Fitbit in a multi-patent and multi-case dispute with Jawbone spanning multiple U.S. District Court and International Trade Commission patent searches relating to technology used to monitor activity and heart rate in activity trackers. (Jawbone v. Fitbit).
Represented Huy Fong Foods (a famous sriracha chili sauce maker) in its dispute with the City of Irwindale (City of Irwindale, et al;)
・Represented VIZIO in multiple patent infringement lawsuits relating to LED edge-lit display technology in Delaware (Delaware Display Group LLC et al v. VIZIO, Inc)
・Represented Glenair in a patent infringement lawsuit relating to connectors used in aerospace applications (Radiall SA et al v. Glenair, Inc)
Represented Discovery Communications in various intellectual property matters, including a patent litigation with Personal Audio, which was ultimately dismissed by Personal Audio (Personal Audio, LLC v. Howstuffworks.com)
・Represented a large steel manufacturer in a $2 million settlement in favor of the client in US patent law and Lanham Act claims as part of a multi-jurisdictional litigation (Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal v. POSCO)
・Defended Amazon.com in multiple patent infringement lawsuits related to Amazon's best-selling e-book reader "Kindle" technology in Delaware (Adrea, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc;)
・Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc. defended Viacom in multiple patent infringement lawsuits relating to technology from the acclaimed video game Rock Band in the Eastern District of Texas (Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc;)
Represented Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon in a patent lawsuit against Inamed relating to bariatric surgical devices and methods (Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon v. Inamed Corporation)
Represented a provider of advanced armor solutions in a trade secret theft case involving armor packages for military vehicles (ADSI v. Southern California Gold Products, et al;).
・In a patent damages lawsuit, when the plaintiff was seeking damages of more than $1100 million, the jury was persuaded to pay only $44 (Juicy Whip v. Orange Bang).
・Represented a foreign company sued by British Petroleum for misappropriation of trade secrets related to equipment manufacturing for an acetic acid plant in China.Denied BP's petition for preliminary injunction for jurisdictional reasons in federal court in Los Angeles, and subsequently denied BP's petition for emergency suspension in the Ninth Circuit. After BP refiled and sought an immediate injunction, it again won a dismissal, allowing the client to ship major equipment (BP v. Yankuang Group)
Member of the California Bar Association.He is fluent in Chinese (Mandarin) and Cantonese.
Articles in the same category
[Webinar held on 3/25] Risk of important information leakage of Japanese companies due to cross-border application of discovery and its response
[On-site seminar held on 3/19] Latest trends in AI and competition law - from a global perspective <Simultaneous interpretation and reception available>
[Webinar held on 3/5] Are you fully prepared for a series of information leaks?: Recommendation of mock training from a crisis management perspective
[3/13 31st Economic Security Study Session] Strategic importance of “India” towards the post-China era
[Webinar held on 3/12] Learning from court precedents: “Initial response and legal measures in cases of trade secrets taken out by retired employees”
[3/26 14th Fraud Countermeasures Study Session] Preparation for responding to whistleblowing - Response to “relief application type” reports and fact finding
[3/7 7th Manufacturing Industry Study Session] Technology and skill transfer using digital technology
Paper search AI: How to use vector concept search
[Co-sponsored by Axcelead Drug Discovery Partners × FRONTEO] Utilization of hypothesis generation AI and target validation in drug discovery research