CONTRACT LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

\u00a0Cartones Ponderosa S A de C V vs Marcom Services Inc<\/em>, (Minn. Dist.) legal counsel for prevailing Mexican manufacturer in collection action.<\/p>\n

Master Leather v. Wen Products<\/em>\u00a0(D.Minn) lead counsel for plaintiff of breach of contract claim involving\u00a0distribution of waxer and polisher supplies (favorably settled). (Illinois case transferred to Minnesota) 899\u00a0F.Supp. 384 (N.D. Ill.).<\/p>\n

Mattson Spray v. Lin<\/em>\u00a0(D.Minn., W.D.Wis.) lead counsel for Taiwanese defendant in breach of contract\u00a0involving spray equipment (favorably settled).<\/p>\n

Schaefer Fan v. J & D Mfg.<\/em> (D.Minn.) lead counsel for defendant in breach of settlement agreement\u00a0claim and on appeal (Fed. Cir.) 265 F.3d 1283, 60 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1194.<\/p>\n

---

\n

COPYRIGHT LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Benson Optical Co v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.<\/em> (D.Minn.) represented prevailing copyright owner in obtaining consent judgment.<\/p>\n

Whelan v. Golden Shovel Agency, LLC<\/em> (D.Minn.) represented copyright owner in copyright case.<\/p>\n

---

\n

EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Koerber v. New Millennium Academy<\/em> (Minn.Dist.) favorable resolution of pregnancy discrimination claim.<\/p>\n

Nu-Life Products, Inc. v. Henricksen<\/em> (D.Minn.) counsel for prevailing defendant dismissing plaintiiffs\u2019 employment and noncompete claims in connection with religious products.<\/p>\n

Wolkenbrod v. AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc.<\/em> (D.Minn) favorable resolution of employment and Whistleblower claims.<\/p>\n

---

\n

FRANCHISE LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Country Inns & Suites by Carlson, Inc. v. Sai Nath<\/em> Investments, Inc. (D.Minn.) counsel for franchisee and guarantors in franchise litigation.<\/p>\n

---

\n

INTERNET<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Royal Bank of Canada, Dain Rauscher v. RBC Dain Rauscher<\/em> WIPO Case No. D2001-1236; 2002\u00a0GENDND 233. (WIPO 2002) lead counsel for prevailing Complainants, which received the transfer of the\u00a0contested domain name <rbcdainrauscher.com>.<\/p>\n

---

\n

INVESTOR FRAUD LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Capital Midwest Fund v. Regents of the University of Minnesota<\/em> (Minn.Dist.) counsel for investors with fraud claims resulting from the subscription of shares in a medical technology startup.<\/p>\n

Minke v. Bankwest, Freedom Solutions<\/em> (Minn.Dist.) counsel for investors with fraud claims resulting from the sale of life settlements adjudicated by jury trial.<\/p>\n

---

\n

PATENT LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Ace Orthopedic v. Orthomet<\/em> (D.Minn.) counsel for prevailing plaintiff of patent infringement claims for\u00a0orthopedic surgical fixation screw.<\/p>\n

Agility Robotics v. KVH Indust.<\/em> (D.Minn.) lead counsel for plaintiffs of patent infringement claims\u00a0resulting in license for mobile satellite phones and televisions containing robotic antenna pointing device.<\/p>\n

Arium v. Scanner<\/em> (C.D. Cal.) action for declaratory relief of non-infringement of patent claims under 35 U.S.C. 271(g) and patent infringement involving semiconductor inspection apparatus and methods\u00a0(dismissed).<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Armorlite v. BMC<\/em> (D.Minn., S.D. Fla.) counsel for defense of patent infringement claim involving\u00a0composition and method of coating ophthalmic lenses.<\/p>\n

Benetton Sportsystem v. First Team Sports<\/em> (D.N.J.) lead counsel for defense of patent infringement claim\u00a0involving children\u2019s size adjustable in-line skates.<\/p>\n

Emco Enterprises v. Larson Mfg.<\/em> (S.D. Iowa) lead counsel for defendant resulting in dismissal of patent\u00a0infringement claim involving door display devices.<\/p>\n

ICOS v. Scanner cases, 486 F. Supp. 2d 330<\/em> (S.D.N.Y. 2007) lead counsel for patentee of patent\u00a0infringement claims involving semiconductor inspection apparatus and methods.<\/p>\n

J & D Sales v. Schaefer Ventilation<\/em> (W.D.Wis.) lead counsel for prevailing plaintiff of patent infringement\u00a0claim involving agricultural equipment.<\/p>\n

Minnesota Scientific v. Thompson Surgical<\/em> (W.D.Mich.) lead counsel for plaintiff of patent infringement\u00a0claim involving surgical retractor support devices.<\/p>\n

Nonvolatile Electronics v. Motorola<\/em> (D.Minn.) lead counsel for prevailing plaintiff of patent infringement\u00a0claim involving giant magneto resistive effect memory cell (favorably settled).<\/p>\n

Novus v. Glass Mechanix<\/em> (S.D.Fla.) lead counsel for prevailing plaintiff of patent infringement claim\u00a0involving windshield repair.<\/p>\n

Scanner v. NVIDIA<\/em> (E.D.Tex.) counsel for patentee of patent infringement claims involving inspection\u00a0methods of semiconductors (dismissed).<\/p>\n

Ross-Hime, Designs, Inc. v. United States<\/em> (NASA) lead counsel for plaintiff of patent infringement claims
\nagainst the government involving robotic manipulators through Markman claim construction hearing.<\/p>\n

Ross\u2013Hime Designs, Inc. v. U.S.<\/em>, 109 Fed.Cl. 725 (Fed.Cl.2013);<\/p>\n

Ross-Hime Designs, Inc. v. United States<\/em>, 2015 WL 6733896 (Fed.Cl., Nov. 03, 20150).<\/p>\n

United Marine Marketing Group, LLC v. Jet Dock System, Inc.<\/em> (MDFla.) counsel for plaintiff favorably resolving declaratory judgment claims of non-infringement of patents for dock assemblies.<\/p>\n

---

\n

PATENT LITIGATION\/ARBITRATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Snap-on v. SPX<\/em> (N.D. Ill.) counsel for prevailing party SPX of patent infringement claims involving\u00a0engine analyzers containing digital displays of waveforms ($44 million arbitration award).<\/p>\n

---

\n

US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Scanner Technologies Corporation v. ICOS Vision Systems Corporation<\/em>, No. 528 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir\u00a02008). To see case click on link Judicial View<\/a><\/p>\n

Schaefer Fan Co. v. J & D Mfg.<\/em>, 265 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2001).<\/p>\n

---

\n

PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Kimmel v. ChiropracticUSA<\/em> (Minn.Dist.) represented plaintiff in malpractice action.<\/p>\n

Norman Graphic Printing Company Limited v. Cummins Law Office<\/em>, P.A. (Minn.Dist.) represented plaintiff\u00a0Hong Kong manufacturer in legal malpractice action.<\/p>\n

---

\n

PRODUCTS LIABILITY<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Remote Techs., Inc. v. Data Int’l Co.<\/em> (D.Minn.) counsel for defendant Taiwanese manufacturer in products\u00a0liability action involving extensive e-discovery ESI.<\/p>\n

Remote Techs., Inc. v. Data Int’l Co.<\/em>, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139986 (D. Minn. Sept. 28, 2012).<\/p>\n

---

\n

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Brown v. Grover, Niccum Docks<\/em> (Minn.Dist) counsel for landowners with claims for quiet title relating to\u00a0riparian rights.<\/p>\n

Carlson v. Branson\u2019s Nantucket<\/em>, LLC (Minn.Dist.) resolved claim for rescission of timeshare.<\/p>\n

PCCP NNN Northstar LLC vs Passport Coffee Inc.<\/em> (Minn.Dist.) favorably resolved termination of\u00a0commercial lease.<\/p>\n

---

\n

TRADEMARK & UNFAIR COMPETITION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Nordic Track v. CSA<\/em> (D.Minn.) lead trial counsel for prevailing plaintiff of Lanham Act claim involving the\u00a0product configuration of exercise equipment ($1 million judgment).<\/p>\n

---

\n

TRADEMARK TRIAL & APPEAL BOARD<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Federated Mutual v. Federated Investors<\/em> (T.T.A.B.) lead counsel for prevailing opposer in opposition\u00a0proceeding resulting in abandonment of the trademark application for FEDERATED for banking services.<\/p>\n

Land O\u2019 Lakes v. Milk Specialties<\/em> (T.T.A.B.) lead counsel for petitioner in cancellation proceeding of the\u00a0mark for KWIX MIX for milk replacer (favorably settled).<\/p>\n

---

\n

TRADEMARK SEARCHES & REGISTRATIONS<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Colors by Drew<\/em>-paint<\/p>\n

Kolbe & Kolbe<\/em>-architectural windows<\/p>\n

Malah<\/em>-ethnic food<\/p>\n

Pipe Pier<\/em>-building materials<\/p>\n

RBC Dain Rauscher<\/em>-financial services<\/p>\n

Sagaci<\/em>-game boards<\/p>\n

Versadock<\/em>-floating docks<\/p>\n

---

\n

TRADE SECRET LITIGATION<\/h2>\n

---

\n

Resistance Tech. v. In\u2019Tech Indust.<\/em> (D.Minn.) \u00a0lead trial counsel for plaintiff of Lanham Act and trade\u00a0secrets claims involving hearing aids (favorably settled).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CONTRACT LITIGATION \u00a0Cartones Ponderosa S A de C V vs Marcom Services Inc, (Minn. Dist.) legal counsel for prevailing Mexican<\/p>\n

Read Now ►<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/98"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=98"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/98\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":99,"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/98\/revisions\/99"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rimaslawfirm.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=98"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}