Bruce Kuyper is a seasoned trial lawyer with extensive experience in intellectual property litigation, principally high-technology patent infringement litigation. He has served as lead counsel in the litigation and appeal of numerous cases before federal district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC) and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. His cases have involved a variety of technologies, including complex computer-related and Internet technologies, electronics, semiconductors, satellites, and medical devices.
He also has significant experience advising clients on strategic matters involving the protection of inventions, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property. His experience also includes conducting acquisition diligence and structuring SEC filings relating to intellectual property.
If you would like to reach Bruce Kuyper directly, please email him at email@example.com.
J.D., University of California, Los Angeles, 1989
- UCLA Law Review
- Moot court participant
B.S., Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, 1986, with honors
- Eta Kappa Nu
- Tau Beta Pi
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
- U.S. District Court, Central District of California
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
DigiTech Image Techs. v. Pentax Ricoh Imaging Co., Ltd.
Represented Ricoh and Pentax in a patent infringement lawsuit that has been asserted against Ricoh and Pentax digital cameras and production printers.
GTZM Tech. Ventures v. Atlantic Broadband Fin.
Represented GTZM Tech. Ventures in asserting a patent related to interfaces between analog telephones and broadband modems.
Represented Lochner Technologies in asserting a patent related to wireless servers and client communications against virtual machine servers, thin clients, smartphones and tablets.
Ceres Commc’ns Techs. v. 8×8 and Ceres Commc’ns. Techs. v. Atlantic Broadband Fin.
Cross Medical Prods. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek
Represented Cross Medical Products as lead counsel in the assertion of four patents against widely used spinal implant products sold by Medtronic. Obtained a permanent injunction against all Medtronic products that had been accused of infringement, and a separate permanent injunction against a Medtronic attempted efforts to design around Cross’ patents, after obtaining summary judgment of infringement and validity.
St. Clair Intellectual Prop. Consultants v. Hewlett-Packard
Represented Hewlett-Packard in a patent infringement lawsuit that had been asserted against Hewlett-Packard’s digital cameras.
Wistron NeWeb Corp. v. Pro Brand Int’l
Represented Pro Brand in a patent infringement lawsuit involving two patents that had been asserted against microwave reflectors used in Pro Brand’s satellite receiver systems. Successfully defeated Wistron’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctionWistron dismissed the case after Pro Brand filed a motion for summary judgment and before the motion was decided.
Cross Medical Prods. v. Spinal Concepts
Represented Cross as lead counsel against Spinal Concepts in asserting three patents against certain Spinal Concepts spinal implant products. The parties settled before trial.
SimpleTech v. Lexar Media
Represented Lexar in a lawsuit involving Lexar flash memory controller and flash memory card patents. Lexar counterclaimed for patent infringement. Obtained summary judgment against all of SimpleTech’s claims, then obtained a settlement whereby SimpleTech took a royalty-bearing license under Lexar’s patents for its past and future sales of Memory Stick products.
SRAM v. Answer Prods.
Represented Answer as lead counsel against SRAM’s assertion of two patents relating to leading mountain bike suspension technology. The parties settled before trial.
Lexar Media v. Pretec
Represented Lexar in asserting several flash memory controller and flash memory card patents against Pretec, Memorex and others. Obtained a preliminary injunction against Memorex’s infringing flash memory card product.
Cross Medical Prods. v. DePuy AcroMed
Represented Cross as lead counsel against this Johnson & Johnson Company. Cross had asserted two patents against some of DePuy’s widely used spinal implant products. The parties settled shortly before trial, with DePuy paying $15 million to Cross and paying royalties on future sales of certain spinal implant products.
CertCo v. PayPal
Represented PayPal as lead lawyer in this patent infringement action against PayPal’s electronic payment services. Created a successful strategy to respond to the lawsuit, which had been filed immediately before PayPal’s IPO was to close, such that PayPal was still able to complete its IPO with negligible disruption from the new lawsuit.
Lexar Media v. Feiya
Represented Lexar in asserting its flash memory controller and flash memory card patents against Feiya and others. The case settled favorably before trial, with Feiya paying a significant sum to Lexar for past infringement and Feiya agreeing to stop selling infringing products.
Lexar Media v. SanDisk
Represented Lexar in asserting a patent relating to flash memory controllers. The case settled favorably before trial.
SanDisk v. Lexar Media
Represented Lexar in defending against a patent relating to flash memory controllers. The case settled favorably before trial.
Answer Prods. v. RockShox
Represented Answer Products as lead counsel in asserting two patents relating to leading mountain bike suspension technology. The case settled favorably before trial, with RockShox agreeing to pay a large sum to answer for past infringement and a patent license.
Laitram v. Hewlett-Packard
Represented Hewlett-Packard in defending against several patents related to calculators. The case settled before trial.
Semitool v. Novellus Sys.
Obtained summary judgment for Novellus of noninfringement of two Semitool patents. The case concerned Novellus’ new equipment for depositing copper on semiconductor wafers.
Xerox v./adv. Hewlett-Packard
Represented Hewlett-Packard in several patent infringement actions in federal courts in numerous locations across the country. The cases involved ink jet printer, laser printer and other technologies. The cases settled favorably for Hewlett-Packard after nearly two years of litigation and after successfully obtaining summary judgment of noninfringement on the first patent asserted by Xerox against Hewlett-Packard.
Hewlett-Packard v. Repeat-O-Type
Represented Hewlett-Packard in a jury trial on trademark infringement and counterfeiting issues. Obtained a total judgment of $1.7 million for Hewlett-Packard, where less than $100,000 of infringing product was at issue.
Stac Elecs. v. Microsoft
Represented Stac in enforcing its data compression patents, one of which Bruce had previously prosecuted. A jury returned a verdict of $120 million in damages, and found the patents valid and infringed.
NTN Communications v./adv. Interactive Network
Represented NTN in a patent infringement lawsuit and other intellectual property lawsuits against Interactive Network. Obtained a decision of noninfringement for NTN. Technology involved interactive games played over satellite and other broadcast media in connection with live sporting and other events.
Digital Equipment v. Micro Tech.
Represented Micro Technology against several Digital disk drive communications patents. Case settled favorably for Micro Technology before trial after successful defense strategy.
Catalina Mktg. v. Interactive Networks
Represented Catalina in asserting its point-of-sale coupon-generating patents. Case settled successfully before trial.
Inter*Act Sys. v. Catalina Mktg
Represented Catalina in defending against a coupon dispensing patent.