Gregory T. Chuebon

• In re Microsoft Browser Extension Litigation (W.D. Wash.).  Representation of Microsoft Corporation in a class action involving Microsoft Shopping.
• Club-Conex LLC v. M&P Golf, LLC d/b/a Cool Clubs (ITC and D. Ariz.)  Representation of Club-Conex LLC and True Spec LLC in proceedings in the District of Arizona and the ITC asserting infringement of Club-Conex’s U.S. patent for temporary golf club adaptors.
• IOENGINE, LLC v. Imation Corp. (D. Del.) and IOENGINE, LLC v. International Media Corporation (D. Del.). Representation of IOENGINE, LLC as trial counsel in cases involving secure USB storage devices.  Two separate juries found all asserted claims of IOENGINE's patent valid and infringed, and credited IOENGINE's founder as the sole inventor of the patented technology, collectively awarding millions of dollars in damages for past infringement.
• IOENGINE, LLC v. PayPal Holdings, Inc. (D. Del.) and Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC (D. Del.). Representation of IOENGINE, LLC as trial counsel in two patent infringement cases involving secure, portable payment devices.  Mr. Chuebon also represented IOENGINE at the PTAB regarding 12 petitions for inter partes review filed by PayPal and Ingenico, securing non-institution of nine of the 12 petitions.  Of the three IPRs that were instituted, the PTAB confirmed the non-invalidity of more than a dozen claims.
• IOENGINE, LLC v. Roku, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Representation of IOENGINE, LLC as trial counsel in a patent infringement case involving streaming media players.
• True Spec Golf LLC and Club-Conex LLC v. Club Champion LLC (S.D.N.Y.).  Representation of True Spec Golf LLC and Club-Conex LLC in a patent infringement case involving proprietary golf club adaptors used for brand-agnostic golf club fitting.
• Re: Certain Universal Golf Club Shaft and Golf Club Head Connection Adaptors, Certain Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (I & II) (ITC).  Representation of Club-Conex LLC as Complainant in two ITC Section 337 Investigations, securing exclusion orders in both.
• TeamTechnik Maschinen und Anlagen Gmbh v. Mission Solar Energy LLC (W.D. Tex.).  Representation of Mission Solar Energy LLC in a patent infringement matter involving solar cell manufacturing.
• Xpoint Technologies. v. Cypress Semiconductor (D. Del.) and Xpoint Technologies v. Farstone Technology (D. Del). Representation of Intel Corp. in two patent infringement cases involving peer-to-peer I/O technology in motherboard chipsets and data backup and recovery software.
• Representation of a major consumer electronics company as a defendant in multiple patent litigation matters regarding flagship mobile phone and tablet devices.
• Azure Networks v. MediaTek Inc. (E.D. Tex.). Representation of MediaTek, Cambridge Silicon Radio International LLC, CSR PLC, Marvell Semiconductor Inc., and Ralink Technology Corp. as defendants in a patent litigation matter involving personal area network devices and communications.
• 3COM Corp. v. D-Link Systems, Inc. (D. Del. and N.D. Cal.). Representation of 3COM Corp. in a patent litigation matter involving early-interrupt networking technology.  A N.D. Cal. jury found all three asserted patents valid and willfully infringed, awarding over US$45 million in damages.
• XR Communications, LLC v. D-Link Systems, Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Representation of Ubiquiti Networks, Inc. as a defendant in a patent litigation involving IEEE 802.11ac networking devices supporting MU-MIMO technology.
• Telinit Technologies, LLC v. Spotify USA, Inc. (E.D. Tex.). Representation of Spotify USA, Inc. as a defendant in a patent litigation matter involving peer-to-peer data hosting and delivery.
• CSR Technology v. Bandspeed, Inc. (D. Ariz., C.D. Cal, and W.D. Tex.). Representation of CSR Technology as a plaintiff in a patent litigation matter involving using frequency-agile systems to detect and identify characteristics of transmitting devices in a network.
• CSR PLC v. Broadcom Corp. and SiRF Technology v. SBCG Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Representation of CSR PLC and SiRF Technology as plaintiffs in patent litigation matters involving GPS receivers used in smartphones and mobile navigation devices.
• Network-1 Security Solutions v. Cisco Systems (E.D. Tex.). Representation of 3Com Corporation as a defendant in a patent litigation matter involving Power-Over-Ethernet technology.
• St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants v. Siemens AG (D. Del.). Representation of Verizon Communications as a defendant in a patent litigation matter involving mobile phone signal processing.
• AmberWave Systems Corp. v. Intel Corp. (E.D. Tex and D. Del.). Representation of Intel as a defendant in two cases involving fabrication of CMOS inverters and integrated circuits.

Includes matters handled at Dechert or prior to joining the firm.