log in
Print | Back

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

George E. Badenoch

George E. Badenoch

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
New York, U.S.A.

tel: +1 212 908 6185
Send an Email

Local Time: Tue. 05:15

Profile

George has over 30 years’ experience in litigations and adversarial matters concerning all aspects of intellectual property, including patents, trade secrets, trademarks and copyrights.

George has had considerable experience in major patent litigations (jury and non-jury) involving computers, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, with particular emphasis on computerized automatic machinery and equipment and automobile parts. His successful trial of a major patent jury case involving computerized equipment for custom designed ductwork led to the largest intellectual property judgment nationwide in that year. His role as lead defense counsel for a large group of automobile importers led to the dismissal of a much publicized case brought by an alleged inventor of intermittent windshield wipers, even though the same plaintiff had previously secured multi-million dollar verdicts against two of Detroit’s big three automobile manufacturers.

George also counsels clients in patent and other intellectual property licensing matters, and has been involved in the licensing aspects of large merger and acquisition transactions.

George has been recognized as a leading lawyer in the IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners (2013), which ranked him in the top tiers in New York for both “Licensing” and “Litigation;” The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers (2013, 2014); New York Super Lawyers (2007, 2009-2016), and The US Legal 500 for his work in the area of “IP – Patent Licensing and Transactional” (2014, 2015) and Patent Litigation (2015, 2016).

He has spoken before domestic and international bar association groups, authored brochures advising the Japanese community on patent matters and appeared on a number of panels teaching licensing and patent litigation matters to other lawyers sponsored by the Practicing Law Institute and the American Conference Institute.

Representative Experience

  • Defended client Toyota against a series of patent infringement cases charging that various automobile telematics and safety systems infringed on some 24 patents of an Acacia subsidiary. Secured mandamus order from the Federal Circuit directing the Eastern District of Texas court to transfer the cases to the Eastern District of Michigan, invalidated several of the asserted patents in inter partes review proceedings before the PTAB, and eventually secured dismissal of all remaining cases. American Vehicular Sciences v. Toyota, et al.
  • Currently represents Toyota in a follow-on patent infringement case brought by American Vehicular Sciences relating to side airbags. American Vehicular Sciences v. Toyota, et al.
  • Successfully defended Toyota against a patent infringement case asserting three patents relating to airbag control systems and blindspot monitoring technology brought by an Acacia subsidiary called Signal IP, Inc. Signal IP, Inc. v. Toyota, et al.
  • Successfully defended client, Elpida, and downstream distributors against parallel suits in Delaware, Washington State and the International Trade Commission charging that Elpida’s memory chips infringe several Intellectual Ventures’ patents. Intellectual Ventures v. Elpida, et al.
  • Successfully defended Elpida in a patent infringement suit brought by Mosaid against client’s memory chips. Mosaid LLC v. Elpida, et al.
  • Represented client Elpida and its successor Micron, Inc. in defending against a patent infringement case filed by MIT and the University of Maryland. The patent was held invalid in parallel IPR proceedings. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, et al. v. Elpida, et al.
  • Represented client Olympus in patent infringement case on photographic storage technology brought by Walker Digital LLC against Olympus and other camera companies. Case was settled as a result of successful parallel reexamination proceedings. Walker Digital LLC v. Olympus, et al.
  • Acted as lead counsel for a large group of automobile importers and secured dismissal of a much publicized patent infringement case brought by the alleged inventor of intermittent windshield wipers, even though the same plaintiff had previously secured multi-million dollar verdicts against two of Detroit’s big three automobile manufacturers. Kearns v. Toyota, et al.
  • Represented Takeda and its distributor, American Home Products, in a complex patent infringement case relating to acellular pertussis vaccines. Secured summary judgment of non-infringement and affirmance of the summary judgment on appeal. Evans Medical, et al. v. American Home Products and Takeda.
  • Represented Olympus and secured successful settlement of cross patent infringement suits brought by Given Imaging against Olympus and by Olympus against Given Imaging relating to capsule endoscopes. Given Imaging v. Olympus.
  • Represented Pico in a patent infringement action on pay TV security equipment. Case was successfully settled after client prevailed on key summary judgment motions. Pico v. Eagle Comptronics.
  • Successfully represented client, Air Liquide, in patent infringement case involving environmentally safer ozone paper bleaching processes. Air Liquide SA v. P.F. Glatfelter.
  • In one of several high-profile patent infringement cases on balloon-expandable heart stents, defended client, Boston Scientific, in long and complex multi-stage litigation. In the initial trial, the jury found several Cordis patents invalid and/or not infringed, but found one claim infringed under doctrine of equivalents based on erroneous jury instruction that was later vacated by the district court. The case was settled after further trials and intervening appeals. Cordis v. Boston Scientific, et al.
  • Represented Construction Technology in combination patent and trade secret case relating to computerized design of air conditioning duct work. Secured multi-million dollar jury verdict and enhanced damages and attorneys fees in client’s favor. Construction Technology, Inc. v. Lockformer.
  • Defended client, Olympus, and successfully settled patent infringement case brought by Welch Allen on video endoscopes. Welch Allen Inc. v. Olympus.
  • Defended client, Olympus, and successfully settled high profile patent infringement action brought by Honeywell against Olympus and others on autofocus SRL cameras. Honeywell Inc. v. Olympus, et al.

Education

BA, Dartmouth College, Physics
Areas of Practice

WSG's members are independent firms and are not affiliated in the joint practice of professional services. Each member exercises its own individual judgments on all client matters.

HOME | SITE MAP | GLANCE | PRIVACY POLICY | DISCLAIMER |  © World Services Group, 2019