Posts Tagged: "finnegan henderson farabow garret & dunner"

Donald Dunner: Looking Back On an IP Icon

Donald Dunner was born in 1931 and spent the first 17 years of his life growing up in New York City’s borough of Brooklyn. In a November 2009 interview published by Washington Lawyer, Dunner recalled his early love for the Brooklyn Dodgers, his family’s victory garden during World War II and his attendance at Stuyvesant High School, a well-respected NYC institution with a science-oriented curriculum. Upon graduating Stuyvesant, Dunner attended Purdue University, where he majored in chemical engineering and served as a fraternity president, sophomore class president and student body president. Dunner credited his work in student government with lighting his career path towards the legal profession and his engineering background led naturally to his patent law practice.

Time Warner Asks CAFC to Vacate $139.8M Reasonable Royalty Awarded to Sprint

John O’Quinn, partner at Kirkland & Ellis and counsel representing Time Warner at the Federal Circuit, argued that the entire verdict should be vacated, not just the damages portion, because the court allowed the jury to use a 2007 verdict granted to Sprint against Vonage on the same asserted patents as evidence to determine the damages award. That verdict involved the use of a 25 percent rule of thumb for determining a royalty rate, a rule that the Federal Circuit has subsequently held to be inappropriate in a landmark ruling in 2011. 

Don Dunner Named Chair of John Marshall’s IP Center Advisory Board

Mr. Donald Dunner, a partner in Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP in Washington, D.C. has accepted JMLS’ offer to chair the Advisory Board of the School’s Center for Intellectual Property, Information and Privacy Law. In accepting the position of Chair of the Advisory Board Dunner stated, “John Marshall is one of the preeminent centers of legal education in the IP field. I look forward to assisting it in that role.”

The Evolution of Patent Jurisprudence, from Giles Rich to Howard Markey to Randall Rader

Written by Don Dunner: ”Fifty-four years ago, a lawyer in the prime of his career was appointed by President Eisenhower to serve as a judge on the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA). Within weeks if not days of that appointment, then Chief Judge of the CCPA, Noble Johnson, chose as his sixth and last law clerk a second year law student. Giles Sutherland Rich was the new judge; I was the new law clerk. Little did I realize at the time that the new judge on the block was about to embark on a judicial odyssey that would extend just short of the 21st century and that would propel him into the rarified atmosphere occupied only by true giants of the profession.”

Chief Judge Rader Takes on Lobbying White House and SCOTUS

The discussion was lively, perhaps even explosive. You could nearly see sparks fly when Chief Judge Rader continued to pepper Seth Waxman with question after question about his opinion on the propriety of parties lobbying the White House in order to obtain a favorable amici brief from the Department of Justice. Rader zeroed in on the slippery slope and obviously is not pleased with the mixing of law and politics, saying: “this is a cause for concern… Politics and law have a divide.” It is indeed troubling that the White House under both President Bush and President Obama have allowed lobbying by parties who seek a favorable DOJ amici brief. Interpretations of the law shouldn’t be for sale, or appear to be for sale to the largest donors.

Supreme Court Patent Watch: i4i Files Brief in Microsoft Case

Microsoft would like to have the standard for invalidating a patent claim lowered to a mere preponderance of the evidence standard. They say that prior art not considered by the Patent Office should not be afforded the same level of deference. I say — why not? Truthfully the standard for invalidating patent claims in court should be the same as it is when a patent is denied. The standard shouldn’t even be as low as “clear and convincing,” rather it should be “abuse of discretion.”

Part 2: Don Dunner on CAFC Judges & Future CAFC Candidates

In this second installment of my interview with Don Dunner, the dean of CAFC appellate advocates, we talk about which judges on the Federal Circuit ask the most difficult questions, who he thinks are capable candidates for future federal circuit vacancies, why the Federal Circuit was created as a specialty court, continued hostility toward a purely specialty court and Congressman Issa’s attempt to create a pseudo-specialty trial court for patent issues. We also touch upon the familiar fun questions and learn that one of Dunner’s favorite movies is a well known courtroom comedy.

Exclusive Interview: Superstar CAFC Advocate Don Dunner

Don Dunner is a partner with Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, and he has argued over 150 cases before the Federal Circuit. Dunner was enormously candid, although many of the things I would have liked to ask him had to be off the table due to ongoing litigation. In fact, Dunner is involved in three exceptionally important cases: TiVo v. Echostar, Microsoft v. i4i and Uniloc v. Microsoft. Thankfully, Dunner did agree to return to talk to us further once these important cases finally resolve without further opportunity for appeal. We did, however, go in depth discussing eBay v. MercExchange, the dynmic between the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit, how he approaches appeals generally and specifically blow-by-blow and which Federal Circuit Judges ask the toughest questions.