Source: https://www.gtlaw.com/ja/professionals/u/ullmer-stephen-m
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:56:10+00:00

Document:
Stephen M. Ullmer focuses his practice on intellectual property matters, particularly patent litigation. He has tried cases involving software, internet technology, cellular technology, and pharmaceuticals, and has litigated cases in federal district courts across the country, at the Patent Trials and Appeals Board, and at the Federal Circuit.
Uniloc USA, Inc., et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., et al. Represented the defendant in a consolidated patent infringement case alleging infringement of 5 patents concerning pedometer functionality.
Uniloc USA, Inc., et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., et al. Represented the defendant in 4 patent infringement cases alleging infringement of 4 patents concerning Bluetooth, LTE and other communication protocols.
Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. Represented the defendant in patent litigation regarding technology for two-way wireless communications, including methods and devices for processing data messages between a mobile unit and a network operations center.
Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. Represented Limelight as petitioner and patent owner with respect to 16 inter partes review petitions concerning patents related to content delivery networks.
Becton, Dickinson and Company v. B. Braun Melsungen AG. Represented the patent owner with respect to 8 inter partes review petitions concerning patents related to catheters.
Music Choice v. Stingray Digital Group Inc. and Stingray Music USA, Inc. Represented the petitioner with respect to inter partes review petitions concerning patents related to the distribution of audio and video content.
Gonzalez v. Tagged & Gonzalez v. New Life Ventures. Represented Tagged and New Life Ventures, won judgement of invalidity after trial in E.D.Tex. in patent litigation relating to digital labels for websites.
EEF v. Personal Audio. Represented EEF, on judgement invalidating Personal Audio’s “podcasting” patent after a trial before the Patent Trials and Appeal Board.
Prolifiq v. Veeva. Represented Prolifiq in patent and trade secret litigation related to software for managing regulated communications for pharmaceuticals and medical devices.
Walker Digital v. MySpace, et al. Represented LinkedIn, MySpace and Tagged against patents asserted against social networks’ use of "friend" relationships.
Teva Women’s Health v. Mylan, Teva Women’s Health v. Lupin, and related matters. Represented Teva at trial and in subsequent appeal regarding patents covering Seasonique, as well as in a set of five other related ANDA cases involving patents covering Seasonique®, LoSeasonique® and Cenestin®.
Global Ground Automation v. Orissa et. al. Represented Global Ground Automation, in case involving patent relating to software for ground transportation.
Core Wireless v. LG. Represented LG in patent litigation involving technology related to standards for cellular telephones.
Fotomedia v. Tagged, et al. Represented social network Tagged against five patents asserted against social networks’ use of technology for displaying, uploading and managing photos.

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