Andrea Pallios RobertsAndrea PalliosRoberts

Represented Twist Biosciences against Agilent Technologies in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit in the California Superior Court for Santa Clara County. Agilent alleged breach of contract, breach of the duty of loyalty and trade secret misappropriation against Twist and certain of its employees. The case settled on the eve of trial on the heels of the filing of numerous dispositive motions by Twist.

Represented Waymo, LLC against Uber in a highly publicized trade secret misappropriation lawsuit in the Northern District of California. After four days of trial in which Waymo presented much of its case-in-chief, the parties reached a favorable settlement for Waymo. Uber granted Waymo a percentage of equity in Uber valued at $245 million, as well as injunctive relief that assures Uber will not use Waymo’s trade secret hardware and software self-driving car technology.

Represented Google Inc. and YouTube in a patent infringement suit in the District of Delaware, in which plaintiff Personalized User Model, LLC accused Google’s search, advertising and YouTube systems of infringing two patents relating to personalization services. The jury found all claims not infringed and the patents invalid as anticipated and obvious. The jury further found that one of the named inventors breached his employment agreement with his prior employer (whose rights to the asserted patents Google had purchased) by failing to assign the inventions to that employer.

Represented Motorola Mobility in trial of a breach of contract action against Microsoft in the Western District of Washington. The case involved standard-setting organizations and FRAND licensing commitments. Microsoft alleged Motorola Mobility breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing in FRAND licensing commitments.

Represented Google Inc. in a suit in the Eastern District of Texas brought by Bright Response, accusing Google’s advertising system of patent infringement. The patent related to a method for providing automatic responses to electronic messages. The plaintiff sought over $120 million in damages. Obtained a complete defense verdict of non-infringement and invalidity as to all asserted claims.