left-caret
Professionnels
Image: Christina A. Ondrick

Christina A. Ondrick

Partner, Litigation Department
Washington, D.C.
2050 M Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
United States

Fax: 1(202) 551-0453

Overview

Christina A. Ondrick is a partner in the Intellectual Property practice of Paul Hastings and is based in the firm's Washington, D.C. office. Ms. Ondrick represents Fortune 500 clients and emerging growth companies in patent litigation before district courts, the Federal Circuit and International Trade Commission. She has significant experience crafting trial strategies for high stakes competitor versus competitor cases with first chair trial experience, having tried a number of cases to juries in various districts throughout the United States. In addition, Ms. Ondrick also has substantial experience handling trade secret, unfair competition, and antitrust claims.

Ms. Ondrick thrives at identifying and implementing trial and case-management strategies that drive success and efficiently meet her client's business needs. She manages intellectual property cases from beginning to end, including conducting pretrial investigations, setting case themes and strategies, managing complex discovery, taking and defending critical depositions of key fact witnesses, working with experts, preparing and arguing discovery disputes, arguing claim construction and case dispositive motions, preparing and presenting fact and expert witnesses at trial, and handling appeals. Her work has resulted in early case dismissals, summary judgment victories, and trial wins.  She has successfully represented high tech clients in a diverse range of technical fields including telecommunications, semiconductors, consumer electronics, optical communications software and hardware, cell phone handsets, medical devices, metallurgy, robotics, power tools, and static displays.

Ms. Ondrick is a registered patent attorney with experience in IPRs, patent prosecution, reexaminations, and interferences before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Accolades and Recognitions

  • Recognized as one of the top ITC patent litigators in the United States by The Legal 500 (2020)

  • Named one of the top rated intellectual property litigation attorneys in Washington, D.C. metro area by Super Lawyers (2018 to present).

  • In 2015, Ms. Ondrick was part of a team recognized as "Legal Lions" for securing a California federal judge's agreement to toss a significant jury verdict based on a flawed damages methodology. That same result was chosen by the Daily Journal publication as a "Top Defense Result" of 2014, an award bestowed on case outcomes that will have a significant impact on intellectual property law going forward.

Education

  • Ms. Ondrick received her J.D. from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, magna cum laude, where she was an editor of the University of Pittsburgh Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif. She earned her B.S. in Chemical Engineering from West Virginia University. While obtaining her undergraduate degree, she performed research relating to coal utilization and processing, with particular emphasis on novel liquefaction catalysts.

  • Ms. Ondrick is admitted to practice in Virginia, the District of Columbia, the Eastern District of Virginia, the Fourth Circuit and Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and before the United States Supreme Court. She is a member of the Virginia State Bar Association, ChIPs, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Federal Circuit Bar Association, and the Intellectual Property Owners Association.

Involvement

  • Ms. Ondrick is active in pro bono matters focusing on human rights and immigration assistance. Her efforts have secured asylum for political refugees and persons facing gender-based persecution.

  • Prior to entering the practice of law, Ms. Ondrick worked as an oil, gas and petroleum engineer and provided engineering services to chemical, petrochemical, and energy companies. She advised clients on engineering design, risk reduction, and loss prevention.

Recent Representations

  • Align Technology, Inc v. 3Shape A/S and 3Shape, Inc. (ITC, Del.) - Represents Align Technology, maker of Invisalign and developer of industry leading intraoral scanners, including three International Trade Commission investigations and multiple Delaware cases, involving patent infringement related to intraoral scanners, 3D imaging and various dental technologies. Co-led three multi-week trials and secured findings of infringement on Align Technology patents and exclusion order recommendation at ITC.

  • Oyster Optics LLC v. Ciena Corporation (EDTX, NDCA) - Represents Ciena in a seven patent infringement action concerning 40G and 100G optical fiber communications equipment. Oyster Optics withdrew four patents after securing various case victories and employing effective case strategies to meet client goals.

  • Sycamore IP Holdings v. ADVA (EDTX) - Served as counsel for ADVA and secured an extremely favorable post-claim construction settlement on a patent related to coding schemes for optical communication systems.

  • Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l v. Power Integrations (Del.) - Represented Fairchild in a two-week jury trial in the District of Delaware on behalf of Fairchild. Jury returned verdict in favor of Fairchild on infringement and awarded damages to Fairchild. Secured voluntary dismissal or findings of non-infringement on four Power Integrations patents.

  • Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l (N.D. Cal., Fed. Cir.) - Served as counsel for Fairchild and System General in a multi-week jury trial involving patents related to semiconductors used in power chargers for improving the efficiency of power conversion based on switching frequency reduction. Arguments resulted in vacatur of damages and an important Federal Circuit decision narrowing the entire market value rule.

  • Core Optical Technologies v. Ciena Corp. (C.D. Cal.) - Served as counsel for Ciena on an optical communications patent relating to the reduction of cross-polarization interference associated with signal transmission in a fiber optic network. Obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of Ciena based on, among other things, a strong ownership defense developed through targeted discovery.

  • Labyrinth Optical v. Ciena Corporation (C.D. Cal.) - Served as counsel for Ciena in its defense against patent infringement claims initiated by Labyrinth Optical, an Acacia entity, involving patented switching architecture for telecommunications equipment.

  • In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablet Computers, and Components Thereof (ITC) - Counsel for HTC in an ITC investigation involving nine patents. The patents related to various aspects of handset technology. After knocking out five of the nine patents in the ITC prior to the hearing, and two more as a result of the hearing, the parties reached a successful global settlement of all pending cases after the Commission granted review on multiple grounds on the two remaining patents.

  • Lambda Optical LLC v. Ciena Corporation, et al. (Del.) - Counsel for Ciena and ADVA in a patent infringement action brought by Lambda Optical, an Acacia entity, involving optical switches in telecommunication systems, including node architecture for modularized and reconfigurable optical networks

  • Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. v. Alphavax, Inc. (D. Mass., Fed. Cir.) - Represented Novartis at the district court and Federal Circuit in a judicial appeal by Alphavax, of an adverse decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in an interference proceeding relating to vaccination methods using alphaviruses. Secured a win at the district court and favorable settlement after appellate argument.

  • Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l (Del.) - Counsel for Fairchild and System General in a multi-week jury trial involving patents related to pulse wave modulation technologies for semiconductor chips used in power chargers.

  • Hitachi Koki v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation (N.D. Ga, E.D. Wisc.) - Successfully represented Hitachi Koki in multi-jurisdiction litigation involving nine patents with both parties alleging patent infringement on technologies for hand-held power tools relating to control circuits, laser alignment, and rechargeable lithium ion batteries. District court actions quickly settled on favorable terms after Hitachi Koki filed various inter partes and ex partes reexamination requests on Milwaukee's patents, which the Patent Office granted as filed.

  • Power Integrations v. FairchildSemiconductor Int'l (Fed. Cir.) - Served as appellate counsel for Fairchild. Obtained a reversal of a large jury damages award against defendant Fairchild and an order by the appellate court that the plaintiff was entitled to virtually no damages, based on faulty claims of extraterritorial damages and other legal errors.

  • McKesson Corp. v. Swisslog (Del. and Fed. Cir.) - Counsel for McKesson in a case involving automated robotic storage systems for the packaging and dispensing of prescriptions within hospital wards. The case settled favorably after multi-week jury trial and appeal.

  • Sybase v. Telecommunications System (E.D. VA) - Represented Sybase and obtained an extremely favorable settlement in the competitor's litigation after filing counterclaim lawsuits and obtaining a positive claim construction ruling. The technology at issue involved enterprise software that manages, analyzes and mobilizes information on handheld devices, using relational databases, analytics, and data warehousing solutions.

  • Telecommunications Systems v. Sybase, et al. (E.D. VA and Del.) - Represented Sybase and obtained an extremely favorable settlement after securing positive claim construction rulings in a case involving software patents related to location-based services for tracking mobile devices.

  • Ciena Corp. v. Corvis Corp. (Del.) - Trial counsel for Corvis in a five‑patent case on optical communications technologies. Obtained extremely favorable settlement on behalf of Corvis after four trials and on eve of a damages trial.

  • Tyco Healthcare Group v. Medrad, Inc. (S.D. Ohio) - Counsel for Medrad, Inc. in a matter against Tyco involving medical injector technology. Obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of Medrad resolving a series of lawsuits between the parties.

Practice Areas

Litigation
Patent Litigation
ITC Section 337 Investigations
Antitrust and Competition
Technology
Trade Secrets
Intellectual Property

Languages

anglais

Admissions

District of Columbia Bar
United States Patent & Trademark Office
Virginia Bar

Education

University of Pittsburgh School of Law, J.D. 2000
West Virginia University, B.S. 1994

Nous contacter

Contactez-nous