Katharine Burke

Practice Group Co-Chair - IP Litigation (Firmwide) Partner

Katharine Burke

Washington, D.C.

P: +1.202.639.7720
F: +1.202.508.9301
  • Motorola Solutions v. Hytera (N.D. Ill.) – Represented Motorola Solutions in assertion of its patents and trade secrets relating to two-way radios.
  • W.L. Gore & Associates Inc. v. C.R. Bard Inc.  (D. Del.) – Represented Bard in suit brought by Gore alleging infringement of medical device patents. Received summary judgment of non-infringement for one patent. Jury found all asserted claims of remaining patent not infringed and invalid on multiple grounds.
  • Licensing matters – Represented large technology companies in various transactional and assertion matters.
  • Chamberlain v. TTI (N.D. Ill.) – Represented Chamberlain in its assertion of trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract claims.
  • NVIDIA v. Samsung (U.S.I.T.C.) – Represented Samsung in suit related to NVIDIA’s assertion that Samsung infringed seven patents related to graphics processing technology. NVIDIA dismissed one patent after favorable claim construction. Commission found all remaining patents not infringed or invalid.
  • Represented climate control manufacturer in assertion of patent related to HVAC control. Jury returned finding in favor on all issues, including infringement and validity.
  • Samsung (U.S.I.T.C.) – Represented Samsung in assertion of Samsung’s patents related to cellular technology. Parties reached a favorable settlement after the hearing.
  • Certain Automated Media Library Devices, No. 337-TA-746 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Defended IBM in case involving automated tape libraries.
  • Represented leading consumer electronics and software company against HTC in the ITC to protect smartphone technologies. Received and enforced an exclusion order barring HTC's infringing products from importation into the U.S.
  • Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing the Same, No. 337-ITC-664 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Defended Samsung in case involving four patents relating to flash memory.
  • Infineon Technologies v. Atmel Corp. (D. Del.) – Represented Infineon in case involving microcontroller technology.
  • Garnet Digital, LLC v. Cellco Partnership and Verizon Communications Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.) – Represented Verizon in case involving telecommunications and video transmission and display.
  • Level 3 Communications v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (E.D. Va.) – Defended Limelight in case involving content delivery networks.
  • Certain Video Security Equipment And Systems, Related Software, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, No. 337-TA-1281 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Representing Motorola Solutions and affiliates as complainants in patent infringement investigation.
  • Certain Chemical Mechanical Planarization Slurries and Components Thereof, No. 337-TA-1204 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Representing CMC Materials as complainant in patent infringement investigation.
  • Moxchange LLC v. Avigilon USA Corp. (D. Del.) – Defended Avigilon in patent infringement action related to video encryption technologies.
  • Cypress Lake Software, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (E.D. Tex. and U.S.P.T.O.) – Defended Samsung in patent infringement suit and inter partes review and ex parte review proceedings relating to streaming and video interface technologies; granted stay of district court suit based on PTO proceedings; settled after stay.
  • Certain Magnetic Data Storage and Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (II), No. 337-TA-1076 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Represented Fujifilm in second investigation of Sony's infringement of a number of Fujifilm patents related to magnetic tape data storage technologies.
  • Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same, No. 337-TA-1012 (U.S.I.T.C.) – Represented Fujifilm in investigation of Sony's infringement of a number of Fujifilm patents related to magnetic tape data storage technologies.