Litigation

Laubscher, Spendlove & Laubscher excels at delivering winning legal strategies in high-stakes intellectual property disputes, including patent, copyright, trademark, false advertising, licensing, ITC Section 337 and trade secret matters.  We work with start-ups to major international corporations, and develop litigation strategies tailored to each client's definition of success.  We invest the time and resources to develop an effective and efficient relationship with our clients that produces better results, reduces costs, and improves the quality of legal services provided.

Our lawyers understand our clients' businesses and the critical role that IP plays in a highly competitive landscape.  We understand the use of litigation as part of a broader intellectual property strategy that directly contributes to competitive success.  

We know how to help our clients protect their intellectual property, but also understand the challenges when all their hard work seems threatened by an unjustified threat or lawsuit.  Through our representations of both plaintiffs and defendants, we have a strategic outlook that better positions our clients to achieve the best possible outcomes.

Our lawyers have experience in significant intellectual property litigation venues across the country, including the Eastern District of Virginia; the Northern District of Illinois; the Northern, Central and Southern Districts of California; the Northern and Eastern District of Texas; the District of Delaware; and before the U.S. International Trade Commission. 

Recent cases that we have worked on include:

  • Memon v. Asphalt Enhancement, LLC (E.D. Va.) – representing plaintiff G. Mohammed Memon;
  • Life Long Driver, LLC v. The American Automobile Association, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) – representing defendant AAA;
  • SwimWays Corporation v. Zuru, LLC (E.D. Va.) – representing defendant Zuru, LLC, achieved a major victory with the judge entering summary judgment that the plaintiffs’ patent was invalid;
  • Medline Industries, Inc. v. Paul Hartmann AG (N.D. Ill.) – representing plaintiff Medline in a declaratory judgment suit;
  • Augme Technologies Inc. v. Millennial Media, Inc. (D. Del.) – representing defendant Millennial Media;
  • Medline, Inc. v. Augustine Temperature Management LLC (N.D. Ill.) – representing plaintiff Medline;
  • MacroSolve, Inc. v. Antenna Software, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) – representing defendant Spring Wireless USA;
  • Walker Digital LLC v. Canon U.S.A. Inc. (D. Del.) – representing defendant Eye-Fi Inc.;
  • Iceberg Industries, LLC v. SoundHound, Inc. (E.D. Va.) – representing defendant SoundHound;
  • LendingTree, LLC v. Zillow, Inc. (W.D.N.C.) – representing defendant NexTag;
  • Tierra Telecom, Inc. v. Level 3 Communications, Inc. (E.D. Va.) – representing defendant Quest Communications;
  • Multimedia Patent Trust v. Directv, Inc. (S.D. Cal.) – representing plaintiff MPT;
  • Rembrandt Data Technologies, LP v. AOL, LLC (E.D. Va.) – representing defendent Hewlett Packard;
  • Footloose Dancewear, Inc. v. Ballet Makers, Inc. (E.D. Pa.) – representing defendant Ballet Makers.
info@laubscherlaw.com  |  © 2005-2015 Laubscher, Spendlove & Laubscher, P.C. | Disclaimer:  The information provided on the laubscherlaw.com web site is for general information purposes only.  Moreover, contact with this web site does not create an attorney-client relationship with Laubscher, Spendlove & Laubscher, P.C. or any of its attorneys.  The information on this web site has been reviewed for accuracy, but may contain errors or omissions.  Liability is disclaimed for any such errors or omissions.