Skip to main content

Nicholas W. Armington

Select Trade Secret Litigation

  • Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc., et al. v. Buan, et al., 19-cv-2648 (N.D. Ill) – Represent Plaintiff in trade secret misappropriation action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
  • Novatrans Group S.A. v. Vital Farms, Inc. et al., 1:18-cv-01012-RGA (D. Del.) – Represented Plaintiff in trade secret misappropriation action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.

Select Patent Litigation

  • Certain Thermoplastic-Encapsulated Electric Motors, Components Thereof, and Products and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-1052, -1073) – Represented Complainant in this ITC investigation, and in parallel Federal District Court cases.
  • Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-984) - Represented Complainant in an ITC investigation adverse to a number of automotive manufacturers, and infotainment system and chip suppliers.
  • Certain Communications or Computing Devices and Components Thereof (337-TA-925) - Represented Complainant in an ITC investigation adverse to a number of consumer electronics companies.

Select Inter Partes Reviews

  • Victory at CAFC: PTAB Decision Reversed and Remanded – Represented Straight Path IP Group in successfully appealing to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) the adverse result of an inter partes review handled by another firm. The IPR decision canceled all challenged claims of Straight Path’s U.S. Patent No. 6,108,704. In the Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Sipnet EU SRO appeal, the CAFC for the first time completely reversed an adverse IPR decision, remanding the matter for further proceedings under the correct construction advocated by Mintz and Straight Path.
  • Defense of Multiple IPRs – Point-to-Point Communication Over Computer Networks – Currently representing Straight Path IP Group in the defense of seventeen inter partes reviews filed against three U.S. patents concerning technology for facilitating point-to-point communications over computer networks. Petitioners include Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Cisco Systems, Inc.; Avaya Inc.; LG Electronics, Inc.; Toshiba Corp.; VIZIO, Inc.; Verizon Communications, Inc.; and Hulu, LLC.
Case Study
Mintz secured a rare US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruling that entirely reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision. The PTAB had canceled each of the challenged claims of Straight Path IP Group’s patent for protocols for establishing communication links through a network.
Case Study
Mintz prevailed in a Federal Circuit appeal regarding Straight Path IP patents that facilitate real-time communications between Internet users. The win against eight accused infringers affirmed PTAB decisions upholding the validity of Straight Path’s patent claims.
Case Study
Mintz protected clients’ patents related to the cholesterol drug Livalo®. Mintz defended against three IPRs filed by generic manufacturers that had filed Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDA) with the FDA and secured Patent Trial and Appeal Board denials of institution of the generic companies’ IPR petitions.