Litigation & Enforcement

When necessary, Attorney Sokol is an experienced intellectual property trial attorney and has successfully represented clients nationwide in the enforcement and defense of numerous intellectual property disputes, including patent, trademark, trade dress, copyright and trade secret claims. He also has experience in determining whether your insurance should provide coverage regarding intellectual property litigation.

Click here to view IP Litigations handled by Attorney Jeffrey Sokol

Case	Technology	Intellectual Property	Outcome
4 R Ventures v. Titan Manufacturing E.D. Wisc., 18-CV-1171	Charcoal baskets for barbecue grills	Patent Infringement. U.S. Patent No. D810,438	Confidential settlement reached after Titan discontinue infringing products.
Bionix v. Jobar Int’l Inc. N.D. Ohio, 14-CV-0405	Earwax removal kits	Patent Infringement. U.S. Patent No. 6,706,023	Case settled after requesting and prevailing on pre-discovery Markman Hearing giving word “flared” a broad meaning. Jobar discontinued importing product from China, selling same in U.S., and molds turned over to Bionix.
Nordock v. Systems, Inc. E.D. Wisc., 11-CV-0118 Published Decisions: 803 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2015). (Precedential). 137 S. Ct. 589 (2016). Nordock, Inc. v Sys., Inc., No. 14-1762, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4732 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 17, 2017).	Front end design of loading dock leveler.	Patent infringement. U.S. Patent No. D579,754. First U.S. Design Patent issued by USPTO for a design pertaining to a dock leveler. Case was before the U.S. Supreme Court during it's deliberation of Apple v. Samsung on issue of determining 35 U.S.C. §289 damages.	Jury trial and verdict finding patent valid and infringed, but no §289 damages. Permanent injunction issued. Federal Circuit granted Nordock’s Appeal No. 14-1762 for retrial of §289 damages given System’s total profit of over $630,000 on infringing levelers. U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit remanded case back to district court to determine new legal “test” to calculate §289 damages. Confidential settlement reached.
JAZ Innovations v. Christmas Tree Shops and Nantucket Distributing E.D. Penn.; 11-CV-932	Fire resistant warp made of low mass, low thermal conductive material placed on rack in oven.	Copyright, Trademark and Trade Dress infringement and Unfair Competition. Copyright. Reg. TX 7-278-082 for packaging/marketing. Trademark Reg. No. 4,038,130 for OVEN RACK GUARD	Case settled after filing motion for preliminary injunction, and a National chain agreed sell OVEN RACK GUARD product through its 1,000 retail stores.
Nova v. Children’s Medical Ventures, Respironics, et al. E.D. Penn.; 10-CV-7618	Supercooled sodium acetate heat packs to facilitate blood draw of new born infants. Activated by aluminum oxide sandpaper trigger.	Patent infringement, Trade Secret misappropriation, Conversion and Correction of inventorship. U.S. Patent No. 6,878,157.	After discovery, depositions and motions for summary judgment, case settled for significant confidential amount.
4Front v. Nordock, N.D. Texas, 08 CV 0642	Loading dock leveler. Offset in lip extension links.	Patent Infringement. U.S. Patent No. 5,475,888.	Settled at initial magistrate mediated conference on confidential terms.
Bionix v. Sklar Corp. E.D. Penn., 07-CV-4465	Molded plastic ear curettes use by physicians and medical personnel.	Breach of contract, Fraud in the Inducement, and Patent Infringement. U.S. Design Patent Nos. D415,275; D420,133; D439,338; D449,888 and D450,676.	After discovery, depositions and motions for summary judgment, Sklar stopped importing infringing products from India and Pakistan, stopped selling products in U.S., and paid Bionix for its litigation fees and expenses.
Bionix v. Miltex E.D. Wisc., 07-CV-0995	Molded plastic ear curettes used by physicians and medical personnel.	Patent Infringement. U.S. Design Patent Nos. D439,338 and D428,489.	After discovery, Miltex discontinued sale of infringing products.
Bionix v. Shoney Scientific, E.D. Wisc., 06-CV-0079	Molded plastic ear curettes use by physicians and medical personnel.	Breach of contract, Fraud in the Inducement, and Patent Infringement. U.S. Design Patent Nos. D415,275; D420,133; D439,338; D449,888 and D450,676.	Settled at magistrate mediated settlement conference. Shoney stopped importing accused products from India.
Fraizer Industries v Layne Christensen Company W.D. Wisc., 04-CV-315	Refurbishing water wells using high energy burst of compressed air and video monitoring.	Patent Infringement. U.S. Patent No. 5,579,845.	Jury Trial and verdict finding patent valid and infringed. Validity subsequently vacated by trial judge on JMOL.
Nelco v. Analytical Processes E.D. Wisc., 03-CV-0721	Computer printer control language (PCL) software/instructions for printing tax forms via a laser printers.	Breach of Contract and Copyright infringement of Registration TXu 1-082-464.	Case settled upon owner of APC’s decision to retire. Client’s litigation expenses covered by insurance.
Anchor Wall Systems v. Bend Industries D. Minn., 00-CV-0650	Masonry wall block for landscaping.	Patent infringement. U.S. Patent Nos. 5,827,015 and 6,142,713.	Settlement reached. Client’s litigation expenses reimbursed by insurance. Other manufacturer fought AWS patents, but settled after CAFC vacated trial court’s summary judgment decision.
J-Star v. Valmetal W.D. Wisc., 96-CV-0236	Silo unloader farm implement.	Product Configuration Trade Dress infringement	Jury Trial and verdict upholding trade dress based on finding of secondary meaning, likelihood of confusion and ornamentality.
Master Medical v. Baxter Healthcare D. Ariz., 92-CV-1973 PHX	Intravenous (IV) flow control device.	Patent infringement. U.S. Patent No. 4,343,305.	Confidential settlement reached.
Weber-Stephens Products v. Margaret Worldwide Merchandize N.D. Ill.,, 90-CV-4732	Kettle shaped barbeque grill design.	Registered and common law product configuration trade dress infringement. Trademark Reg. Nos. 1,478,530; 1,481,520; 1,481,521 and 1,479,505.	Case settled after officer of Thailand manufacturer arrested by U.S. Marshalls at McCormick Place trade show in violation of contempt order.