Harold H. Davis, Jr.

Shareholder

Hal is a trial lawyer. He serves as lead counsel in high value patent, trade secret, unfair competition, and trademark disputes. Hal focuses much of his practice on representing Asia-based technology companies in litigation matters in the United States.

Hal litigates various intellectual property matters and actions in federal courts and before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) on behalf of semiconductor manufacturers, computer design and manufacturing companies, computer software companies, smartphone and internet backbone hardware companies, electronics providers, biotechnology research entities, telecommunications providers, and other technology companies. He also represents clients before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

In addition to his litigation practice, Hal counsels clients on an array of IP matters, including intellectual property protection, registration, and management issues, as well as intellectual property development and investment. In his licensing practice, Hal represents clients in patent, trademark, and copyright licensing, as well as in strategic partnerships and intellectual property asset purchases. He also advises on website development and the development of intellectual property security procedures, in addition to joint venture and co-development projects.

Concentrations

  • Patent, trademark, and trade secret disputes
  • Unfair competition claims
  • ITC litigation
  • IP registration, licensing, and management
  • Strategic partnerships
Read More +

Capabilities

Experiencia

  • In the matter of Certain Batteries and Electrochemical Devices Containing Composite Separators, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1087 (USITC) - Lead counsel for Amperex Technology, DJI Technology Co. Ltd, DJI Technology, Inc.; co-counsel for Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., OPPO Digital, Inc.°
  • In the matter of Certain Amorphous Metal and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1078 (USITC) -Lead counsel for Qingdao Yunlu Energy Technology Co., Ltd.°
  • In the matter of Certain Wi-Fi Enabled Electronic Devices and Components Thereof Such as Spare Parts, Inv. No. 337-TA-1072 (USITC) - Lead counsel for Sharp; settlement reached.°
  • In the matter of Certain Robotic Vacuum Cleaning Devices and Components Thereof Such as Spare Parts, Inv. No. 337-TA-1057 (USITC) - Lead counsel for BISSELL and Matsutek; settlement allowing continued U.S. operations for client.°
  • In the matter of Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith, Inv. No. 337-TA-1045 (USITC) -Lead Counsel for IPEVO; Complainant withdrew complaint before trial without settlement.°
  • In the matter of Certain Personal Transporters and Components Thereof. Inv. No. 337-TA-1007/1021 (USITC) - Lead Counsel for Changzhou Airwheel Technology Co.; trial victory on behalf of Airwheel finding no violation.°
  • In the matter of Certain Industrial Control System Software, Systems Using Same, and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1020 (USITC) - Lead counsel for Advantech Co., Ltd. and Advantech Corp.; Complainant withdrew complaint against Advantech.°
  • In the matter of Certain Composite Bulk Intermediate Containers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1014 (USITC) -Lead counsel for Zhenjiang Runzhou Jinshan Packaging Factory; Complainant withdrew complaint on eve of expert reports without settlement.°
  • In the matter of Certain Set-Top Boxes, Gateways, Bridges and Adapters and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-915 (USITC) — Lead counsel for Wistron NeWeb against ViXs in patent litigation involving MoCA related technology.°
  • In the matter of Certain Television Sets, Television Receivers, Television Tuners, and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-910 (USITC) — Lead counsel for Wistron against CrestaTech in patent litigation involving TV Tuners.°
  • In the matter of Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-853 (USITC) — Represented respondent Acer in patent litigation involving microprocessor design; finding of no violation, affirmed by Commission.°
  • In the matter of Certain Computer and Computer Peripheral Devices, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same, 337-TA-841 (USITC) — Lead counsel for respondent Acer in patent litigation involving flash memory card readers; finding of no violation, affirmed by Commission.°
  • In the matter of Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same, Inv. 337-TA-803 (USITC) — Represented respondent Hynix against Intellectual Ventures in DRAM and NAND flash-related memory patents.°
  • In the matter of Certain Coenzyme Q10 Products and Methods of Making Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-790 (USITC) — Represented respondent Shenzhou at trial in patents involving production of Coenzyme Q10; finding of no violation by ALJ and affirmed by Commission.°
  • In the matter of Certain Notebook Computer Products and Components, Inv. No. 337-TA-705 (USITC) — Represented respondent Wistron Corporation against Toshiba Corporation involving various laptop computer patents. Settlement reached after filing of pre-hearing briefing.°
  • In the matter of Certain Flash Memory Controllers, Drivers, Memory Cards, and Media Players and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-619 (USITC) — Represented respondent Apacer against SanDisk; finding of no violation.°
  • ELM 3DS Innovations, LLC v. SK hynix Inc. et al., 14-cv-1432 (D. Del.) - Lead counsel for SK hynix in 13 patent case involving stacked memory devices.°
  • ELM 3DS Innovations, LLC v. Michelle K. Lee, (E.D. Va.) - Lead counsel for intervenor SK hynix relating to APA challenge to PTAB inter partes review decisions.°
  • Phenix Longhorn, LLC v. Wistron Corp., 2:17-cv-711 (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for Wistron in patent case involving LCD screens.°
  • Wireless Switch IP, LLC v. Acer, 6:17-cv-142 (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for Acer Inc. in patent case.°
  • Alacritech v. Wistron Corp. et al., 2:16-CV-0693 (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for Wistron Corp. in patent infringement case involving networking technology.°
  • Infogation Corp. v. ZTE Corp., 3:16-cv-01901 (S.D. Cal.) - Lead counsel for ZTE; plaintiff dismissed case with prejudice without settlement.°
  • Mobile Synergy Solutions LLC v. Coolpad Group Ltd., (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for Coolpad, a smartphone manufacturer, in patent case involving visual voice mail; settlement reached.°
  • Anton Innovations, Inc. v. Getac Inc. et al., (C.D. Cal.) - Lead counsel for Getac, a ruggedized computer manufacturer in patent case involving wireless transceivers; settlement reached.°
  • Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. ZTE et al., 2:16-cv-002 (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for ZTE in patent infringement action involving text/voice instant messaging; case stayed pending inter partes review
  • TCL Communications Technology Holdings, Ltd. v. Telefonaktienbolaget LM Ericsson et al., 14-cv-341 (C.D. Cal.) - Lead counsel for third party ZTE in action involving setting of FRAND rate.°
  • Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Wistron Corp. et al., 2:15-cv-01366 (E.D. Tex.) - Lead counsel for Wistron in patent infringement litigation involving television tuners; settlement reached.°
  • Rockstar Consortium US LP et al. v. Asustek Computer Inc. et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-894 (E.D. Tex.) — Represented Asus in patent litigation involving various technologies associated with Android Operating System Platform.°
  • Patent Harbor v. HP et al., Case No. 6:13-cv-00103-LED (E.D. Tex.) — Represent Hewlett-Packard in patent litigation involving video authoring software. Settlement reached during discovery.°
  • Enova v. Western Digital et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-00004 (D. Del.) — Represented Western Digital in patent litigation involving encryption technology. Settlement reached before trial. .°
  • Acer v. Technology Properties Limited et al., Case No. 5:08-cv-00877 — Represented Acer and Gateway in a declaratory action. Technology Properties Limited has counterclaimed for patent infringement and asserted five patents from the Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio against Acer and Gateway. The patents concern microprocessor design and operation.°
  • Toshiba Corp. v. Wistron Corp., Civil Action No. 8:10-cv-00074-SVW-MLG (C.D. Cal.) — Represented Wistron in district court in laptop patent dispute. Case settled.°
  • Phillip M. Adams & Assoc. LLC. v. Wistron Corp., (D. Wyo. 2011) — Represented Wistron and AOpen in district court in laptop patent dispute involving floppy disc controllers. Motion to dismiss granted for clients.°
  • DRAM Technology v. America II Group et al., Case No. 2:10-cv-45 (J. Ward) — Represented ESMT, semiconductor design company, in patent infringement action relating to DRAM patents.°
  • LSI/Agere v. Xilinx, Case No. 09 Civ. 9717 (S.D.N.Y) (J. Rakoff) — Represented Xilinx in a patent infringement action involving twenty patents relating to field-programmable gate array (FPGA) and other related technologies.°
  • Typhoon Touch v. Dell, Civil Action No. 6:07-cv-546 (E.D. Texas) (J. Davis) — Represented Dell and Lenovo in a patent infringement action involving two touch screen patents. Achieved summary judgment of non-infringement.°
  • Global Innovations v. Acer America Corp., Case No. 09-20127 (S.D. Fla.) (J. Moreno) and Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-00198 (E.D. Texas) (J. Folsom) — Represented Acer, Alienware, Dell, Gateway, and HP in patent infringement litigation concerning two computer security patents. Achieved settlement.°
  • Represented semiconductor manufacturer with patent license negotiation involving hundreds of patents. Negotiated agreement that prevented litigation.°
  • CPUMate v. Acer America Corp. et al., Case No. 08-cv-01865 (D.N.J.) (J. Wolfson) — Represented Acer and Wistron in patent infringement litigation relating to heat sink technology. Achieved dismissal of clients.°
  • Universal Tech., Inc. v. Frogger, Civ. Action No. 0:10-cv-00075-JNE-JSM (D. Minn. 2010) — Represented Frogger, golf equipment manufacturer, in district court in golf towel patent dispute. Case settled.°
  • Halloran v. Frogger, (D. Mass. 2010) — Represented Frogger, golf equipment manufacturer, in district court in golf brush patent dispute. Case settled after filing of motion for summary judgment.°
  • Krinner v. TerraSmart LLC, (M.D. Fla. 2011) — Represented TerraSmart, solar power equipment manufacturer, in patent dispute over earth screws. Case settled.°
  • Gellyfish v. Acer et al., Case No. 2:08-cv-170 (E.D. Tex.) — Represented Acer and Gateway in a patent infringement action relating to handpads on laptop computers.°
  • Wistron v. Samsung Electronic Co., Case No. C 07-04748 VRW (N.D. Cal) — Represented Wistron in a patent infringement action where Samsung had alleged infringement of three patents relating to computer keyboard hot key functions, battery charging power-saving methods, and data storage and retrieval methods. The parties entered into a patent license agreement on a mutually acceptable basis, including a patent cross license, and the lawsuits between them were dismissed.°
  • Wacom Co. v. Hanwang Technology Co., Case No. 3:06-cv-05701-RJB (W.D. Wash.) — Represented Hanwang Technology, a leading Beijing based consumer electronics company, in a patent infringement suit involving electronic drawing tablets. Obtained summary judgment, in part, that invalidated key asserted patent based on prior art he uncovered during litigation. Shortly thereafter, the parties settled the case.°
  • Linex Technologies, Inc. v. Acer et al.; Case No. 2:07-cv-00222 (E.D. Tex.) — Represented Acer in a patent infringement case filed by relating to wireless telecommunications routers. Linux dismissed its claims against Acer.°
  • Represented international corporation in patent infringement litigation involving narrowcasting and digital media networks.°
  • Ichor Medical Sys., Inc. v. Richard Walters et al., Case No. 99CV 1332 J (S.D. Cal.) — Represented trade secret and patent infringement defendant in matter involving medical devices, biomedical treatments, and licensing issues involving electroporation technology.°
  • Insight Dev. Corp. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 4424 (Fed. Cir. 2002) — Handled patent infringement and trade secret appeal to Federal Circuit involving printing and file sharing technology.°
  • Typhoon Touch v. Dell, Case No. 2009-1589 (Fed. Cir.) — Represented Dell and Lenovo in appeal to Federal Circuit on claim construction ruling.°
  • In re Porauto Industrial Co., Ltd., Case No. 2014-130 (Fed. Cir.) — Represented Kabo Tool in defense against mandamus.°
  • Typhoon Touch v. Dell, Case No. 2009-1589 (Fed. Cir.) — Represented Dell and Lenovo in appeal to Federal Circuit on claim construction ruling.°
  • Torostek LLC v. Sapido et al., Case No. 5:07cv1488 (C.D. Cal.) — Achieved settlement in trademark infringement matter over “matrix” term.°
  • com v. Sapido et al., Case No. 5:07-cv1489 (C.D. Cal.) — Achieved settlement in trademark infringement matter over “@” term.°
  • Represented mobile media device company in trademark infringement action involving advertising campaign by smart phone manufacturer.°
  • The Wine Group LLC and Golden State Vintners v. Keswick Winery et al., Case No. 06-2055 JW/PVT (N.D. Cal.) (March 2006) — Achieved settlement in trademark infringement matter over “Edgewood” term.°
  • Rebel Wine Co. LLC v. The Wine Group LLC, Opposition No. 91169052 (T.T.A.B. 2006) — Achieved settlement in opposition over “Wine Bandits” term.°
  • Global Granite & Marble LLC v. Global Granite Stone & Supply LLC, Case No. 05-02374-BBD-dkv (W.D. Tenn. 2005) — Achieved settlement in trademark infringement matter over “Global Granite” term.°
  • Societe Des Hotels Meridien et al. v. LaSalle Hotel Operating Partnership, L.P., 380 F.3d 126 (2nd Cir. 2004) — Assisted in representation of a hotel and hotel property management company in appeal to Second Circuit involving Lanham Act claims of reverse passing off.°
  • Assisted in representation of movie and television studies in various trademark suits involving movie and television features.°
  • Assisted in representation of a record label and executives in copyright infringement of sound recordings case involving international copyright, contributory infringement, and vicarious liability issues.°
  • Assisted in representation of a medical software company; summary judgment granted in copyright infringement of software based on temporary RAM copying theory.°
  • Arcsoft, Inc. v. Cyberlink Corp. et al., 15-CV-03707 (N.D. Cal.) - Lead counsel for Cyberlink and Perfect Corp. in trade dress litigation involving selfie app; won motion to dismiss and ultimate settlement.°
  • Ventria Bioscience v. Yang— Represented Ventria in trade secret action against former employee. Achieved settlement.°
  • Represented executives against former employer in theft of trade secret and breach of duty claims.°
  • Represented Silicon Valley technology company against former employee in trade secret misappropriation action; injunction obtained against former employee.°
  • Amphenol Corp. v. Aero Electric Connector et al., Case No. 06-5340 (C.D. Cal. 2006) — Represented client in trade secret and unfair competition lawsuit.°
  • Teligent, Inc. v. Clara Vista Corp. et al., Case No. 00-CV-1311 (E.D. Va. 2000) — Assisted in representation of satellite telecommunications firm in multimillion-dollar lawsuit involving trade secret, false advertising, and Lanham Act claims.°
  • Represented major movie studios in DVD counterfeiting case.°
  • Represented corporate executive in criminal trade secret investigation involving Silicon Valley technology firm.°
  • Won a defense verdict on behalf of a private equity finance company and its owner after a four-month jury trial where plaintiffs sought more than $200 million in damages.°
  • Osanitsch v. Marconi PLC, Case No. 05-03988-CRBW (N.D. Cal. 2005) — Won dismissal of fraud and breach of contract action on behalf of large, international telecommunications company.°
  • Represented pharmaceutical company in third-party discovery dispute involving multidistrict tort litigation and protected disclosure of trade secrets.°
  • Represented foreign-based technology firm in price fixing investigation.°
  • PSINet Consulting Solutions Knowledge Servs., Inc. v. Saudi Petro Gas Co. Ltd., Civ. No. 01-320, 2001 WL 869616 (D. Minn. Aug. 1, 2001) — Represented PSINet in breach of contract suit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.°
  • Sea-Land Serv. Inc. et al. v. United States, 239 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2001) — Assisted in representation of U.S. shipyard in customs appeal to U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit.°
  • Foggy Bottom Ass’n v. Board of Zoning Adjustment et al., 791 A.2d 64 (D.C. Ct. App. 2002) — Represented amicus in appeal on behalf of GW Hospital involving environmental and zoning issues relating to construction of new hospital; amicus brief quoted with approval from court.°

°The above representations were handled by Mr. Davis prior to his joining Greenberg Traurig, LLP.

Recognition & Leadership

  • Listed, Acritas Stars™ Independently Rated Lawyers, “Star Lawyers,” 2017-2019
  • Member, ITC Trial Lawyers Association
  • Board of Directors, The Guardsmen, 2010-2013

Credentials

Educación
  • J.D., cum laude, University of Miami School of Law, 1999
    • Senior Articles Editor, University of Miami Law Review
  • B.A., cum laude, The George Washington University, 1996
Admitida para practicar como abogado en
  • California
  • District of Columbia
  • Maryland
  • Tennessee