Protecting Intellectual Property Through Patents, Copyright, and More
Intellectual property is a creative or intangible good originating from human intellect. Intellectual property typically requires a party to legally obtain protection for a specified time period to allow that particular party to maintain a competitive edge and profit from the idea. Artists typically protect their work through copyright; inventors use patents; and businesses may use trade secrets, non-disclosure agreements and more. Intellectual property can serve as the cornerstone of a brand, its value and profitability. Intellectual property infringement may result in significant historical and future economic damages. In some cases, the economic harm of intellectual property infringement may be irreparable.
Why Hire an Intellectual Property Expert Witness?
Most industries deal with some type of intellectual property, or intangible asset. When facing theft of intellectual property, or trying to prove the opposite, a CPA expert witness is key to winning your case. With experience and trial testimony across a broad range of industries, Thomas Neches is an intellectual property expert witness who understands the norms and business practices guiding your case.
When valuing intellectual property, our firm analyzes quantitative data to demonstrate the current and future profit-generating value of the property. Hiring a CPA expert witness is one of the few ways for plaintiffs to win back what’s been lost and for defendants to rebut overstated claims. Learn more about our representative engagements and trial testimony involving intellectual property, including copyright, patents, trademarks, trade secrets, royalties and more, below.
Representative Intellectual Property Engagements
|Case Number||Attorney||Law Firm||Industry||Property||Side||Testify|
|Linco Inc. v. Top Lighting Corporation||Mitchell F. Ducey||Masserman & Ducey LLP||Photography Equipment||Patent||Pln||Trial|
|Jim Beam Co. v. Tequila Cuervo||Anthony A. Coppola||Abelman, Frayne & Schwab||Distilled Spirits||Trademark||Def|
|Maker’s Mark v. Tequila Cuervo||Anthony A. Coppola||Abelman, Frayne & Schwab||Distilled Spirits||Trademark||Def||Trial|
|Bio-Touch, Inc. v. The Wella Corporation||Kamram Fattahi||Law Offices of Kamran Fattahi||Cosmetics Manufacturing||Trademark||Pln|
|Gary H. Kent v. Glenn Anderson, et al.||Joshua M. Dickey||Bailey Merrill||Appraisal||Trade Secret||Def|
|Amity Rubberized Pen Company v. Market Quest Group, Inc., et al.||Gary A. Brenner||Law Offices of Gary A. Brenner||Advertising Promotional Products||Patent||Def|
|Thermo-Ply, Inc. v. The Ohio Willow Wood Company, et al.||Richard E. Fee||Fee & Jeffries||Prosthetic Components||Patent||Pln||Depo|
|Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce Factory, Ltd. v. Star Mark Management, Inc., et al.||Anthony A. Coppola Richard L. Crisona||Abelman, Frayne & Schwab||Food Manufacturing & Distribution||Trademark||Pln||Depo Trial|
|Advanced Magnetic Closures, Inc. v. Rome Fastener Corporation, et al.||Anthony J. DiFilippi||Abelman, Frayne & Schwab||Apparel Manufacturing||Patent||Pln||Trial|
|On Command v. NXTV||Edward A. Klein Heather Gilhooly||Liner Yankelevitz Sunshine & Regenstreif||Broadcasting and Telecommuni-cations||Trade Secret||Pln|
|CSL, L.L.C. v. Imperial Building Products, Inc.||Marc M. Gorelnik||Townsend and Townsend and Crew||Chemical Manufacturing||Patent||Pln|
|2 B Free, LLC v. Guess ?, Inc.||Sandra J. Garcia Steve Mason||Newell, Campbell & Roché||Apparel Manufacturing||Trademark Tradedress||Pln|
|Neutrogena Corporation and DermaNew, Inc. v. Spa Sciences, Inc.||Wayne M. Barsky Jason C. Lo||Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher||Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing||Patent||Pln|
|Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce Factory, Ltd. v. Eastimpex, et al.||Marc M. Gorelnik Timothy R. Cahn David Aronoff||Townsend and Townsend and Crew||Food Manufacturing & Distribution||Trademark||Pln||Trial|
|Joel D. Wallach v. Longevity Network, Ltd.||Michael A. Painter||Isaacman, Kaufman & Painter||Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing||Trademark||Def|
|Eaton Power Quality Corporation v. J.T. Packard & Associates, Inc.||Joseph F. Cleveland, Jr.||Brackett & Ellis||Computer & Electronic Product Service||Copyright, Trademark, Trade Secret||Def|
|MGE UPS Systems, Inc. v. Titan Specialized Services, Inc., et al.||David R. Cross||Quarles & Brady||Computer & Electronic Product Service||Copyright||Def|
|Bella Rosa, LLC, et al. v. Derek A. Van de Water, et al.||Barry Van Sickle Kirk Downing||Law Offices of Kirk Downing||Special Trade Contractors||Trademark||Pln||Trial|
|Juicy Whip, Inc. v. Orange Bang, Inc.||Wayne M. Barsky Jason C. Lo||Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher||Juice Syrup Manufacturing||Patent||Def||Depo Trial|
|Dermal Research Laboratories, Inc. v. Naturopathic Laboratories International, Inc.||Jeffrey A. Schwab Anthony J. DiFilippi||Abelman, Frayne & Schwab||Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing||Patent||Def||Depo Trial|
|Health Net, Inc. v. Provider HealthNet Services. Inc.||Elizabeth B. Gibson Bob Mangels||Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro||Health Care||Trademark||Pln||Depo|
|PMC, Inc., et al., v. Paul Winkler, et al.||Skip Miller||Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro||Plastics Product Manufacturing||Patent||Pln||Trial|
|Morrison Entertainment Group, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc., et al.||Luan K. Phan||O’Neill, Lysaght & Sun (Richardson & Patel)||Toy & Video Game Manufacturing & Exploitation||Trademark||Pln||Depo|
|Genesco Inc. v. Mudd. LLC||I.C. Waddey, Jr||Waddey & Patterson||Apparel Manufacturing||Trademark||Def|
|Anex Electrical Co., Ltd. v. Sun-Mate Corporation||Michael A. Painter||Isaacman, Kaufman & Painter||Consumer Electronics Manufacturing||Trademark||Def||Trial|
|California Animal Laboratory, Inc. v. American Home Products Corporation||Howard B. Soloway||Morrison & Foerster||Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing||Patent||Def|
|Donald G. Delaria and Delaria’s Kitchen, Inc. v. KFC Corporation||Jeffrey H. Dasteel||Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom||Food and Beverage Stores||Trademark||Def|
|Duraflame, Inc. v. Conros Corporation||David W. Grace||Loeb & Loeb||Paper and Chemical Products Wholesale||Trademark||Pln|
|Professional Audio Concepts, Inc. v. Conrad Viva, et al.||Christopher J. Arndt||Arndt & Doyle||Wood Product Manufacturing||Trademark||Def||Trial|
|Threads 4 Life, Inc. dba Cross Colours v. Paco Sport, Ltd.||Steven J. Rottman||Law Offices of Steven J. Rottman||Apparel Manufacturing||Trademark||Pln|
|Mag Instrument v. Brinkmann Corp.||Robert C. Weiss||Lyon & Lyon||Machined Aluminum Flashlight Manufacturing||Patent Trademark||Pln|
Key Sample Representative Intellectual Property Engagement
Maker’s Mark Distillery, Inc. v. Diageo North America, Inc., et al. (Anthony A. Coppola, Michael Aschen – Abelman, Frayne & Schwab). Mr. Neches testified as an expert in United States District Court, Western District of Kentucky, on behalf of defendant in this trademark infringement matter. Plaintiff, who manufactures and sells Maker’s Mark bourbon, claimed defendants, who manufacture and distribute Jose Cuervo brand tequilas, infringed plaintiff’s trademarked wax-like coating that covers the cap of the bottle and trickles down the neck of the bottle in freeform tendrils. The Cuervo brand at issue was its premium product, Jose Cuervo Reserva de la Familia. In his decision, the Court noted that “Makers Mark’s damages expert argued that the Georgia-Pacific factors support an award of a 5% royalty on Reserva sales. [Mr. Neches] analyzed the factors and recommended the Court award no damages or damages no greater than 1% of Reserva sales.” The Court also cited Mr. Neches’s testimony that “Cuervo did not profit from the use of the dripping wax because sales of Reserva grew proportionally, before, during and after Cuervo used the dripping wax.” Result: the Court ruled that Maker’s Mark’s trademark was valid and infringed, but declined to award monetary damages.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THOMAS NECHES DIRECTLY AT 213.624.8150.CONTACT US