|
Brian E. Ferguson is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP based in the Firm's Washington, D.C. office. Brian is a member of the Intellectual Property, Media & Technology Department and serves as the firm-wide deputy head of the Intellectual Property, Media & Technology Department.
Brian's practice is devoted to high technology patent disputes. He has substantial experience in handling patent-related appellate matters, having handled dozens of appeals and successfully argued numerous appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Brian also acts as lead and co-trial counsel in numerous patent infringement and validity disputes before the district courts and Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), including arguing and presenting evidence at jury trials, bench trials, and Markman proceedings. Much of Brian's litigation practice has involved divergent technologies such as analog and digital integrated circuit designs, computer source code and software design, semiconductor processes, medical devices, Internet technology, telecommunications hardware and software, digital half toning and printing technology and model train technology.
Brian is a former adjunct professor at the George Washington University School of Law, where for several years he taught a course on Patent Enforcement. Brian has authored numerous papers and articles concerning patent litigation and technology issues. In July 2007, he was asked by United States Senators Specter and Kyl to provide comments on pending patent reform legislation. He is one of the leading legal expert commentators on patent matters, as he regularly appears on Bloomberg TV and has been quoted in Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Bloomberg News, the Washington Post, the L.A. Times, the Chicago Tribune, Investor's Business Daily, the Toronto Star, the National Post, PC World and many other publications. He has been recognized as a leading intellectual property lawyer by The Best Lawyers in America, named a 2007 Lawdragon 500 leading lawyer nominee in the area of intellectual property and was identified in The Legal 500 (2007 ed.) as one of the leading intellectual property practitioners in the United States, earning praise for being "very knowledgeable and very creative."
Brian received his degree, magna cum laude, in electrical engineering. He is admitted to practice in New York, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and before numerous U.S. District Courts and the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Representative Experience:
Successfully argued before an en banc panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the case In re Seagate Technology LLC , in which the Federal Circuit changed the standard for proving willful infringement and clarified the scope of attorney-client privilege waiver in patent cases.
Successfully argued appeal before the Federal Circuit on behalf of Medtronic, Inc. in a case of first impression concerning the statutory construction of 35 U.S.C. � 119.
Successfully argued Federal Circuit appeal on behalf of Ion Beam Applications, SA. The Court affirmed the lower court's ruling that two patents asserted against Ion Beam were invalid. The case is reported at 469 F.3d 978 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
Successfully argued Federal Circuit appeal vacating a grant of summary judgment against NeoMagic Corporation. The case is reported at 287 F.3d 1062 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
Represented Research Corporation Technologies in separate patent litigations against Hewlett-Packard and Lexmark. The case against HP settled favorably to RCT on the second day of trial. The Lexmark case settled following favorable Markman and summary judgment rulings for RCT.
Lead counsel for American International Group, Inc. and 17 subsidiaries in patent case involving interactive voice processing (the Katz patents).
Lead counsel for Lycos, Inc. in patent case against TiVo, Netflix and Blockbuster concerning information filtering technology.
Representing Research Corporation Technologies in on-going patent litigation against Microsoft. Argued early summary judgment motion, granted by the Court, finding that Microsoft infringed RCT's patents.
Represented Medtronic in patent litigation against Edwards Lifesciences. Following settlement of the district court case, an arbitration panel ruled in favor of Medtronic regarding one of the patents in suit.
Represented Sprint in patent litigation against Aerotel, Ltd. regarding pre-paid calling card technology.
Education:
Albany Law School of Union University, J.D., 1991
Union College, B.S.E.E. (magna cum laude), 1988 | 