Source: http://ruttenbergiplaw.com/attorneys/guy-ruttenberg/
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 16:13:09+00:00

Document:
Guy Ruttenberg is the founder of Ruttenberg IP Law, A Professional Corporation. A graduate of Harvard Law School and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Mr. Ruttenberg has represented major corporate clients in federal and state courts, as well as before the international trade commission (ITC). Mr. Ruttenberg’s practice focuses primarily on patent litigation matters and other areas of intellectual property and counseling. Before starting Ruttenberg IP Law, A Professional Corporation, Mr. Ruttenberg worked for 12 years (including 7 years as a partner) at the international law firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP. Mr. Ruttenberg also spent six months as a visiting attorney in Beijing at the Chinese law firm of Broad & Bright and one year as an exchange attorney in Tokyo at the Japanese law firm of Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu. A frequent lecturer in the area of transnational intellectual property litigation, Mr. Ruttenberg is a native speaker of English and Hebrew, with a basic working knowledge of German and Japanese.
Abbott Diabetes Care v. DexCom, Inc.
Represented Abbott Diabetes in asserting seven patents relating to blood glucose meters; replaced national firm as lead counsel; successfully moved to lift stay on litigation; asserted additional patent; negotiated favorable settlement for client.
Represented j2 Global in asserting its ONEBOX® trademarks; obtained stipulated permanent injunction; negotiated favorable settlement for client.
Defended pet toilet supplier against competitor’s allegations of patent infringement; obtained partial summary judgment on non-infringement; developed extensive counterclaims; negotiated favorable settlement for client.
PCT et al. v. EZconn et al.
Represented Taiwanese clients against various tort and contract claims relating to alleged misappropriation of technology; successfully defeated Plaintiffs’ motion for jurisdictional discovery; obtained dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Successfully defended DIRECTV in patent infringement action relating to satellite telecommunications in the Western District of Texas. Obtained full defense in favor of DIRECTV by invalidating the Plaintiff’s patent at the summary judgment stage. Judgment was affirmed on appeal before the Federal Circuit.
Successfully defended Honeywell in patent infringement lawsuit relating to foam blowing agents. Obtained fully favorable defense verdict invalidating the Plaintiff’s patent on three independent grounds. Successfully defended the jury verdict in post-trial motions. Case is presently on appeal.
Part of a team that successfully defended Limelight in patent infringement litigation involving content delivery networks. Obtained fully favorable defense verdict from jury in the Eastern District of Virginia. Successfully defended verdict on post-trial motions and on appeal before the Federal Circuit.
Represented AWR in software piracy litigation asserting claims for breach of contract and copyright infringement against Chinese telecommunications company. Obtained summary judgment of liability on breach of contract claim. Case settled favorably on the eve of trial.
Represented Covidien/Mallinckrodt in two patent infringement actions, one in Eastern District of Texas, the other in District of Delaware, involving medical equipment. Second chaired jury trial before Judge John Ward in Marshall, TX. Successfully opposed multiple summary judgment motions brought by Defendants. Case settled favorably hours before closing arguments.
Represented Digeo against Gemstar’s allegations of patent infringement relating to interactive programming guide technology, and in asserting antitrust claims challenging Gemstar’s licensing practices. Case settled favorably after Digeo submitted summary judgment motions.
Represented Intel in two patent infringement actions, one in Eastern District of Texas, the other in Northern District of California, involving WiFi and WiMAX telecommunications technology. Coordinated damages strategy for Intel and approximately twenty co-Defendants in the EDTX matter. Case settled favorably on the eve of trial.
Cadent, Ltd. v. 3M Unitek Corp.
Represented 3M in breach of contract and inventorship litigation involving software patents related to orthodontic treatment. Obtained favorable settlement for client.
Zenith Electronics Corp. v. Sichuan Changhong Electric Co., Ltd.
Represented Zenith in suit asserting Zenith’s television tuner patents against Chinese television importer.
D.R.I.P., Inc. v. R.M. Wade & Co.
Represented D.R.I.P. in suit alleging breach of licensing agreement and infringement of pulsating sprinkler patent. Successfully dismissed Wade’s counterclaims for breach of contract, and defeated Wade’s motion to transfer venue. Obtained favorable settlement for client after filing summary judgment motions.
Zenith Electronics Corp. v. Konka Group Co. Ltd.
Funai Electric Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Electronics Corp.
Represented Zenith in a suit involving a challenge to Zenith’s television tuner patents and counterclaims by Zenith for infringement of the patents.
Razor USA LLC v. Asa Products, Inc. et al.
Represented Razor in a suit asserting Razor’s brake patent, trademark and trade dress against various infringing importers. Obtained temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions against multiple defendants. Defeated defendants’ interlocutory appeals to the Federal Circuit. Cases settled favorably for client.
The materials on our website are for informational purposes only and do not convey legal advice. This information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship with our firm. Please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you speak with one of our attorneys and receive our authorization to send such information to us. Our firm makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the information presented on or through our website.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.