Source: https://www.ulmer.com/attorneys/bennett-john-f/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 18:20:09+00:00

Document:
John is an accomplished patent litigator who also has extensive experience with cases involving trademark, copyright, trade secrets, unfair competition, data security incidents, and other intellectual property claims. In addition, John has experience handling complex business litigation. John’s success in complex litigation is the result of meticulous preparation and persuasion through effective communication. His experience covers a wide range of technologies, and he has represented clients in matters before federal district courts throughout the U.S., including the largest patent multidistrict litigation in history, as well as the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), and the International Trade Commission (ITC). John is the chair of the Cincinnati Bar Association’s IP Litigation Committee, and he speaks and writes regularly on a variety of intellectual property topics. John is nationally recognized by The Best Lawyers in America® in Litigation – Intellectual Property and Litigation – Patent. He was named Best Lawyers 2019 “Lawyer of the Year” in Cincinnati for Patent Litigation and is repeatedly named to the Ohio Super Lawyers list as well as rated AV Preeminent® by Martindale-Hubbell®, its highest available rating for legal ability and professional ethics. John also serves as an adjunct professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.
Represented patent owner against accused infringers related to laser technologies (Newport Corporation v. Lighthouse Photonics Inc., CD California, Case No. 8:12-cv-00719).
Represented petitioner challenging patentability of water-filtering technologies through petition for inter partes review (Kaz USA, Inc. v. Brita LP, IPR 2016-01893).
Defended accused infringer in largest multidistrict litigation in U.S. history against patent claims involving portfolio of more than 50 patents relating to automated call distributors, interactive voice response products, computer telephone integration, and speech recognition (In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, CD California Case No. 2:07-ml-01816).
Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to probiotic compositions (Ganeden Biotech, Inc. v. American Brewing Company, Inc., et al., ND Ohio Case No. 1-16-cv-876).
Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to technologies for vehicle floor assemblies (National Shelter Products, Inc. v. PlyVeneer Products, ND Ohio Case No. 5-14-cv-2013).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet communications technologies (Arunachalam v. Axcess Financial Services, Inc., D. Del. Case No. 1:13-cv-01335; Axcess Financial Services, Inc. v. Pi-Net International, Inc., SD Ohio Case No. 14-cv-00319).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to computer forensics technologies (In the Matter of Certain Computer Forensic Devices and Products Containing the Same, International Trade Commission, Case No. 337-TA-799).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to DVD scene selection menus (Patent Harbor, LLC v. Audiovox Corporation, ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00361).
Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to food packaging technology in declaratory judgment action (Huhtamaki, Inc. v. PWP Industries, Inc., SD Ohio, Case No. 1:09-cv-795).
Defended accused infringers against patent claims related to DVD technology (TV Interactive Data Corporation v. Sony Corporation, et al., ND California, Case No. 5:10-cv-00475).
Defended accused infringers in multidistrict litigation against patent claims related to lip-syncing automation in video games (case is ongoing—McRO, Inc., dba Planet Blue v. Codemasters USA Group, et al., D. Del.
Case Nos. 1:13-cv-01017 and 1:13-cv-1756).
Defended accused infringer in multidistrict litigation against patent claims related to transportation logistics technologies (R+L Carriers, Inc. v. Pegasus Transtech Corp., SD Ohio Case No. SD OH, 1:09-cv-00177-SJD).
Represented accused infringer in dispute concerning alleged indemnity obligations arising from patent case(Kroger Co. v. Ateb, SD Ohio, Case No. 1:2009-cv-00196).
Represented patent owner against accused infringers related to networking and medical practitioner verification technologies (Medversant Technologies, LLC v. Morrisey Associates, Inc., CD California Case No.
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies for monitoring traffic information over a network (Cincinnati Bell Inc. v. Traffic Information LLC, Oregon, Case No. 3:10-cv-01453).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to interactive video networks (EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00379).
Defended accused infringers against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems (Arrivalstar S.A. et al v. Trailer Bridge, Inc. et al., MD Florida, Case No. 8:09-cv-01307; Cincinnati Bell, Inc. v. Arrivalstar S.A., SD of Ohio, Case No. 1:11-cv-00274).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet technologies (GeoTag v. Medicine Shoppe, ED of Texas Case No. 2:11-cv-404).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to telephone encryption technologies (ISwitch, LLC v. Cincinnati Bell Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-118).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies allowing secure financial transactions over a network (Swipe Innovations, LLC v. Elavon, Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 9:12-cv-0040).
Represented copyright owner of costume against accused infringers (Stagecraft Costuming Inc., v. Househaunters, et al., SD of Ohio Case No. 1:10-cv-00917).
Defended ISP against claims for accused copyright infringement (Allure Jewelers, Inc. v. Ulu, et al., SD Ohio Case No. 1:12-cv-00091-MRB).
Represented aircraft parts supplier against company for unfair business practices related to alleged PMA misuse (Transicoil LLC v. Aaxico Sales Inc., et al., SD Florida Case No. 1:10-cv-24427-PAS).
Represented trademark owner against accused infringer (Situs, Inc. v. Situs Realty Corp., SD Indiana Case No. 1:09-cv-01570).
Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to variable data printing technology (Tesseron, Ltd. v. Punch International NV et al., MD Florida, Case No. 6:10-cv-00909).
Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to technology for analyzing compilations of retail sales data over a network (dunnhumby USA, LLC v. emnos USA Corporation, ND Illinois Case No.
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet technologies (CWC v. Hugo Boss, ED Texas Case No. 6:12-cv-00674).
Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies for recording and monitoring of call centers (Verint Systems, Inc. v. CallCopy, Inc., D. Del. Case No. 1:13-cv-00562).
Represented copyright owner against alleged infringement related to consumer baby products (Kohus v. Graco Children’s Products, Inc., et al., SD Ohio Case No. 1:09-cv-503).

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