James L. Day

James L. Day is a partner in the San Francisco office of Latham & Watkins and a member of the firm's Intellectual Property and Technology practice group. He has experience in complex litigation matters before federal and state courts including patent, trademark, trade secret, licensing, unfair competition and other complex commercial disputes focusing particularly on technology disputes.

Mr. Day's representative intellectual property and high technology matters include the following:

• Adobe Systems, Inc. - Represented defendant Adobe in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Acacia in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology in this case involved software activation technology. This case settled before going to trial. Also represented defendant Adobe in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Z4 Technologies, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology in this case also involves software activation technology. This case settled before going to trial.
• Adecco, Inc. and its subsidiary Ajilon Professional Services - Represented defendant Ajilon in defense of trade secrets misappropriation, breach of contract and economic interference claims brought by competitor Robert Half International in the Santa Clara County Superior Court in California. This matter included the successful defense to a motion for preliminary injunction filed at the outset of the case.
• Akamai Technologies, Inc. - Represented plaintiff Akamai Technologies in lawsuit involving claims of trade secrets misappropriation against its competitor Speedera Networks and counterclaims by Speedera alleging violation of California antitrust, unfair practices and unfair competition laws filed in the Santa Clara County Superior Court in California. Early in this lawsuit Akamai obtained a preliminary injunction against Speedera that remained in effect until the matter settled shortly before trial with Akamai's acquisition of Speedera.
• Aviza Technology, Inc. - Currently representing defendant Aviza Technology in a trade secrets misappropriation case brought by plaintiff IPS Ltd. in US District Court for the Central District of California involving semiconductor capital equipment and process technology. This matter has involved the successful defense of a preliminary injunction motion brought by IPS.
• BigBand Networks, Inc. - Currently representing plaintiff BigBand in a patent case brought in the US District Court for the District of Delaware against Imagine Communications, Inc. The patents at issue in this case relate to digital broadcast over cable telecommunications networks.
• BioLucent, Inc. - Represented plaintiff BioLucent in a patent case brought in US District Court for the Central District of California involving patents related to medical devices. This matter was settled before trial.
• Cricket Communications, Inc. - Currently representing defendant Cricket Communications in several patent cases brought by several different plaintiffs in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas involving patents related to pre-paid wireless phone technology. Also representing defendant Cricket Communications in a patent case brought by plaintiff VIPC in US District Court for the Southern District of California involving patents related to videophone technology.
• Genentech, Inc. - Represented defendant Genentech in successful defense against patent infringement and breach of contract claims brought by Genzyme in the US District Court in Delaware, relating to the development of Genentech's product TNKase®, a modified human protein used as a "clot buster" to treat heart attacks.
• GoClear LLC - Currently representing plaintiff GoClear LLC in trademark case brought in US District Court for the Northern District of California.
• Mentor Graphics Corporation - Represented Mentor Graphics in several related lawsuits against competitors Quicturn Design Systems and Cadence Systems including various claims of patent infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and violation of antitrust laws.
• Senetek PLC - Represented Senetek in several related lawsuits against its former licensees OMP, Inc. and Rhoto Pharmaceuticals involving various claims of trade secrets misappropriation, breach of contract, unfair competition and antitrust violations. All actions were resolved favorably before trial.
• Qualcomm Incorporated - Represented defendant Qualcomm in patent infringement suit brought by plaintiff Upaid Systems, Ltd. in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. This case involved patents related to cellular telecommunication technologies and was favorably resolved before trial.
• VNUS Medical Technologies - Represented VNUS, a medical device manufacturer, in patent infringement suit brought against three of its direct competitors in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
• XP Power and its subsidiary XP-ForeSight - Represented XP in trade secret misappropriation lawsuit brought against its former supplier Astec America, Inc. This matter involved close coordination with counsel in a parallel UK action. Both actions were resolved favorably before trial.

Mr. Day's experience in consumer class actions includes the defense of numerous clients in representative and class actions under California's unique consumer protection laws, particularly the Unfair Practices Act and the Unfair Competition Law. Representative cases, in addition to those mentioned above, include:

• General Electric Company - Represented GE in nationwide class action arising from a product recall. This matter involved successfully defending an initial motion for preliminary injunction, settling the matter on a national class basis in the face of various challenges from plaintiffs attorneys in other competing lawsuits and finally a successful appeal to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the settlement in Churchill Village LLC v. General Electric, 361 F.3d 566 (2004).
• Lexmark International, Inc. - Represented Lexmark in unfair competition and false advertising lawsuit brought by a group of companies that supplied after-mark ink cartridges for Lexmark printers in competition with Lexmark. The trial court in the Northern District of California granted summary judgment rejecting all claims against Lexmark and that decision was upheld in its entirely by the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals in Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Ass'n v. Lexmark Intern. Inc., 421 F. 3d 981 (2005).

Mr. Day is the author of "The Challenges and Uncertainty of Patent Disputes," Intellectual Property Law 2008: Top Lawyers on Trends and Key Strategies for the Upcoming Year and "The Many Stages of a Patent Dispute," Inside the Minds: Patent Litigation and Dispute Resolution, both published by Aspatore Books in 2008. Other publications include "Branding Issues: Brand Protection and Anti-Counterfeiting Measures," Intellectual Property Rights Forum (Hangzhou, China, April 2007) and "Overview of Current Claim Construction Practice in View of Phillips," Patent Claim Construction 2007: The Advanced Legal Forum (West LegalWorks, January 2007). Mr. Day presented on the topic of "Patent Reform" at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology Luncheon Series at UC Berkeley.

Mr. Day is qualified to practice before the California bar. In addition, he is qualified to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and 9^th Circuit and the United States District Courts for the Northern and Eastern Districts of California.