Source: https://www.brookskushman.com/our-team/member/christopher-smith/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 22:01:49+00:00

Document:
Christopher Smith`s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, with a primary emphasis on patent litigation. Additionally, Chris is involved with the prosecution of patent and trademark applications, and the preparation of invalidity and infringement opinions.
Chris is a registered patent attorney authorized to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He has represented clients from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups and individual inventors in a variety of industries. Chris is experienced in a wide range of technologies including: (1) automotive, including infotainment; (2) medical devices; (3) internet, including content deliver networks; and (4) telecommunications, including fiber optics.
Chris is also experienced in prosecuting patent applications. His experience in patent prosecution has helped him better understand the process of obtaining a patent, including analyzing file histories, which has been invaluable to him during litigation, especially in formulating claim construction and invalidity positions.
Prior to joining Brooks Kushman, Chris was a patent litigation attorney at Kirkland and Ellis in Los Angeles, where he was involved in a number of cases involving cutting-edge technologies. While doing so, he was a member of several trial teams which were able to win favorable outcomes for their clients.
Chris earned a Bachelor of Science in Engineering degree in Materials Science and Engineering from the University of Michigan and a law degree from UCLA. Additionally, Chris worked as a judicial extern for the Honorable R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California, where he gained valuable insight into the inner workings of the federal judiciary.
Outside of the office, Chris enjoys fishing and swimming with his kids, bowling, and trying to avoid sand traps and water hazards on the golf course.
Kar Enterprises v. Ford Motor Company (D. Mass. 2013): Counsel for defendant Ford Motor Company in patent infringement lawsuit involving speed limiting system for a vehicle. Chris was involved in all facets of the case including claim construction, inventor depositions and preparation of expert reports. The case concluded in a favorable settlement for Ford.
Omega Patents, LLC v. General Motors LLC et al. (N.D. GA 2013): Counsel for defendants General Motors and Onstar in a patent infringement lawsuit involving vehicle remote systems. Chris was involved in all facets of the case including preparation of defendants` invalidity defenses and claim construction arguments. The case concluded in a favorable settlement for defendants.
Omega Patents, LLC v. Lear Corp. (M.D. Fla. 2011): Counsel for defendant Lear Corporation in patent infringement lawsuit involving vehicle remote start technology. Chris` duties included preparation of the Markman brief and motions for summary judgment as well as several pre-trial filings. The case concluded in a favorable settlement.
Mallinckrodt, Inc. et al. v. E-Z-EM, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2010): Counsel for plaintiffs Mallinckrodt, Inc. and Libel-Flarsheim Company in a patent infringement lawsuit involving contrast injector systems for CT scans and MRIs. Chris` duties included the preparation of inventor witnesses for deposition, the preparation of expert reports and the drafting of Markman briefing.
Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. DirecTV, Inc. et al. (E.D. VA 2009): Counsel for defendant DirecTV in a patent infringement lawsuit involving modems used in satellite TVboxes. Chris` duties included inventor and expert depositions and the preparation of expert reports. Summary judgment was granted in favor of DirecTV.
Level 3 Comms., LLC v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (E.D. VA 2009): Counsel for defendant Limelight Networks in patent infringement lawsuit involving content delivery networks. Chris was an integral member of the trial team that obtained a jury verdict of non-infringement for defendant Limelight Networks. The jury verdict was affirmed on appeal.
Akamai Techs., Inc. et al. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (D. Mass. 2009): Counsel for defendant Limelight Networks in patent infringement lawsuit involving content delivery networks. Chris was an integral member of trial team for defendant Limelight Networks. Chris worked on all facets of the case including discovery, trial and the preparation of post-trial briefing, which included preparation of a motion for reconsideration that was granted and resulted in overturning the jury verdict to find no infringement by Limelight.
Foremost In Packaging Sys. v. Cold Chain Techs., (C.D. Cal. 2006): Counsel for defendant Cold Chain Technologies in a patent infringement lawsuit involving transportation coolers for pharmaceuticals. Chris was an integral part of team that prepared successful motions for summary judgment in favor of Cold Chain Technologies.

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