Jump to:
Hyun-Joong (Daniel) Kim is an experienced trial lawyer focusing his practice on patent matters in a wide array of technical fields, including smartphones, semiconductors, software, automation system, automotive technology, LED displays, appliances, life sciences, biotechnology, and medical devices.
Daniel has represented both foreign and domestic clients in high-stakes intellectual property disputes in a number of jurisdictions, including federal district courts, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and United States International Trade Commission. Daniel has experiences at all stages of litigation, from pre-suit investigation through trial and appeal, and has managed day-to-day activities of large scale litigations.
Daniel is a native Korean speaker and earned his B.S.E. degree from Duke University with dual majors in Biomedical and Electrical Engineering.
Experience
- Firstface v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.): Representing Samsung in a five-patent suit concerning mobile devices.
- Bishop Technology Tech LLC v. LG Electronics, Inc. (E.D. Tex.): Representing LG in a twelve-patent suit concerning LCD display technology.
- Staton Techiya, LLC v. Harman International Industries, Inc.: Successfully defended Harman in a multi-patent dispute relating to electronic components within automotive vehicles.
- Kim v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D Tex.): Defended Samsung in a multi-patent dispute relating to mobile devices and their unlocking mechanisms.
- A Global Leader in Automotive Component Manufacturing – Advised the client in revamping its compliance policies.
- ParkerVision, Inc. v. LG Electronics Inc. (W.D. Tex.) – Representing LG in a 10-patent litigation involving Wi-Fi wireless down conversion technologies.
- EcoFactor, Inc. v. LG Electronics USA, Inc. (C.D. Cal.) – Represented LG and successfully dismissed a patent infringement complaint asserting patents generally related to HVAC system.
- Ajinomoto Co., Inc. et al. v. CJ CheilJedang Corp. et al. (S.D.N.Y.) – Defending CJ adverse to its competitor Ajinomoto in a two-patent dispute relating to genetically-modified bacteria for the production of L-Tryptophan.
- Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Micron Technology, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) – Representing IP Bridge in a four-patent suit relating to the fabrication and design of DRAM chips.
- Represented Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in an ITC matter involving trade secrets concerning mobile devices.
- Ultravision Techs., LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) – Defended Samsung in a multi-patent dispute relating to LED displays.
- A Global Vehicle for Hire Company (D. Del.) – Successfully dismissed a patent infringement complaint, based on a patent directed to a global positioning system (GPS) device, against a global vehicle for hire company.
- A Global Leader in Medical Technology, Services, and Solutions (PTAB) – Defended the patent owner in inter partes reviews of patents relating to stents and medical devices made of shape memory alloys.
- A Global Leader in Medical Technology, Services, and Solutions (D. Del.) – Defended a global leader in medical technology, services, and solutions in patent litigation related to medical devices for disease inspection and diagnosis.
- Ropes & Gray LLP (UDRP) – On behalf of the firm, obtained domain names confusingly similar to Ropes & Gray’s trademark from cybersquatters.
- Ragner Technology Corp. et al. v. National Express / Telebrands (D.N.J.) – Represented patent owner Ragner Technology Corp. and exclusive licensee Tristar Products, Inc. in a set of competitor cases, asserting patents covering expandable garden hoses and methods of use, as well as false advertising and unfair competition claims.
- Certain L-Tryptophan, L-Tryptophan Products, and Their Methods of Production (337-TA-1005 / Fed. Cir.) – Defended CJ CheilJedang adverse to its competitor Ajinomoto in a two-patent dispute relating to genetically-modified bacteria for the production of L-Tryptophan. Secured initial determination of no violation of Section 337 at trial, with the presiding Administrative Law Judge finding both patents to be invalid and not infringed and that Ajinomoto failed to satisfy the domestic industry requirement.
- Abiomed, Inc. v. Maquet Cardiovascular, LLC (D. Mass.) – Represented Abiomed in a matter relating to an intravascular blood bump.
- Allure Energy, Inc. v. Honeywell International Inc. (W.D. Tex.) – Member of the team that defended Honeywell International Inc. in a patent infringement litigation involving smart thermostats.
- CardioNet, LLC et al. v. Mednet Healthcare Techs., Inc., et al. (E.D. Pa.) – Member of the team that prevailed in proving contempt of the consent judgment by co-defendant MedTel24, Inc. Appeal dismissed.
- CardioNet, LLC et al. v. the ScottCare Corp., et al. (E.D. Pa.) – Represented plaintiffs in a patent infringement litigation involving five patents directed to remote cardiac monitoring devices.
- Invista North America S.a. R.I. v. Hanwha Corporation (TTAB) – Successfully defended Hanwha in an opposition proceeding, permitting Hanwha to register its word-and-design mark for renewable energy services.