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 setting trial strategies for high stakes competitor cases with first chair trial experience, having tried a number of cases to juries in various districts throughout the United States. Ms. Ondrick has also defended numerous cases brought by non-practicing entities in the usual venues for such cases. In addition, Ms. Ondrick also has substantial experience handling trade secret, trademark, unfair competition and antitrust claims.
Ms. Ondrick manages 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. 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 has also assisted clients with the development and improvement of intellectual property protection and licensing strategies as well as intellectual property due diligence efforts.
Ms. Ondrick is a registered patent attorney with experience in patent prosecution, reexaminations and interferences before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
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.) – 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.
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. Fairchild Semiconductor 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.
In re Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-735 (ITC) – Represented Complainant Spansion LLC in a matter against Samsung and other Respondents involving flash memory technology. Obtained favorable settlement on behalf of Spansion on the eve of the ITC hearing that resolved a series of pending lawsuits involving the parties.
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 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.
(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.
- Sycamore IP Holdings v. ADVA