Charles M. McMahon

CoolTVNetwork.com v. Blackboard Inc. (D. Del. 2021); defended a provider of online collaboration services against in this patent infringement case filed by a non-practicing entity, resulting in favorable claim construction and a summary finding of invalidity as to all asserted claims.*

Wakefield v. Blackboard, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022); represented a provider of online collaboration services in defending this appeal filed by a non-practicing entity, favorably resulting in affirmance of the district court’s claim constructions and summary finding.*

INVT SPT LLC v. ITC (Fed. Circ. 2022); represented manufacturer of cellular communications devices in this appeal filed by a non-practicing entity, resulting in affirmance of the ITC’s favorable ruling of non-infringement.*

Certain Cloud-Connected Wood Pellet Grills (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1237, 2022); represented a leading manufacturer of wood pellet grills as the complainant in this investigation, resulting in a finding of infringement and issuance of a limited exclusion order.*

Werner Co. v. Louisville Ladder, Inc. (W.D. Ky 2023); represented a leading ladder manufacturer accused of infringing a competitor’s patent, resulting in dismissal of the competitor’s patent infringement claim after successfully challenging the asserted patent claims.*

Certain Semiconductor Devices Having Layered Dummy Fill (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1342, 2023); represented a leading manufacturer of imaging sensors as a respondent in this investigation, resulting in favorable resolution and the client paying zero in settlement fees.*

Jawbone Innovations, LLC v. ZTE Corporation (E.D. Tex. 2024); defended a manufacturer of wireless communication devices in this patent infringement action, which resulted in a favorable resolution.*

Class Technologies Inc. v. AK Meeting IP LLC (S.D. Fla. 2024); defended a provider of online collaboration services against patent infringement charges filed by a non-practicing entity, resulting in favorable resolution.*

Certain Automated Mechanical Transmission Systems for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Trucks and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 503, 2005); represented respondents ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc., in this Section 337 patent infringement investigation at the International Trade Commission; in the violation phase of the investigation, the ITC granted respondents’ motion for summary determination with respect to one of the six asserted patents; the ITC also terminated the investigation, at the patent owner’s request, with respect to two other patents and several claims of the remaining three patents; after a ten-day hearing on the merits, the administrative law judge ruled in favor of the respondents on all but one claim of one patent; the respondents designed around the one remaining claim, and Charles helped them work with Customs and Border Protection to ensure continuous importation of the redesigned product; when the patent owner brought an enforcement action, Charles helped ZF and ArvinMeritor become the first respondents ever to defend successfully against such a proceeding at the ITC; as a result of this victory, ZF and ArvinMeritor were able to continue the importation and sale of the redesigned product without interruption.*

ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc., in this patent infringement action involving automated heavy-duty truck transmission technology; after a two-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict on all issues.*

Eaton Corporation v. ZF Friedrichshafen A.G. and ArvinMeritor, Inc. (E.D. Mich. 2008); represented defendants.*

Lithium Battery Patent Enforcement (W.D. Wis. 2008); represented Energizer Holdings, Inc., and Eveready Battery Co. in this case involving two patents for advanced primary battery technology; the court granted a preliminary injunction to halt sales of the infringing batteries.*

AOL, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2009); represented Yahoo! as a declaratory judgment defendant and asserted patent infringement claims on behalf of Yahoo! against AOL; the dispute was resolved on favorable terms.*

Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-800, 2013); represented a manufacturer of wireless devices named as a respondent in this investigation, resulting in a finding of non-infringement.*

McDavid v. NIKE (N.D. Ill. 2014); represented NIKE and an individual challenging inventorship in this patent infringement litigation involving athletic wear; the case was resolved on the eve of a trial on the inventorship claim.*

Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-868, 2014); represented a manufacturer of wireless devices named as a respondent in this investigation, resulting in a finding of non-infringement.*

InterDigital v. US International Trade Commission (Fed. Cir. 2015); represented a named respondent from the underlying ITC investigation, resulting in a decision affirming the ITC’s finding that no valid patent claim was infringed.*

Technology Properties Limited v. ZTE (N.D. Cal. 2015); defended a manufacturer of wireless communication devices in this patent infringement action, which resulted in a favorable claim construction ruling and a stipulation of non-infringement.*

ZTE v. InterDigital (PTAB 2015); served as lead counsel in a successful inter partes review proceeding, in which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board cancelled claims that had previously survived a jury validity verdict.*

InterDigital v. ZTE (D. Del. 2015); led a trial team to a favorable defense jury verdict in this case involving wireless communication technology.*

Technology Properties Limited v. ZTE (N.D. Cal. 2017); defended a manufacturer of wireless communication devices on remand from the Federal Circuit in this patent infringement action, resulting in summary judgment of non-infringement.*

ZTE (USA) Inc. v. Evolved Wireless, LLC (PTAB IPR2016-757, -758, -1277, -1280, -1349; 2018); represented supplier of cellular communications devices in this campaign of IPR proceedings, resulting in cancelation of all asserted claims for four of the five asserted patents.*

ZTE (USA) Inc. v. Evolved Wireless (Fed. Cir. 2019); represented supplier of communications devices in defending favorable PTAB ruling, resulting in affirmance of the cancelation of all challenged claims.*