Current Employment Position(s)

Partner

Lawyer Overview

Ken Adamo practices in the area of intellectual property law, including patent, trademark, copyright, unfair competition, trade secrets, bankruptcy, employment contract, and related antitrust matters. He has extensive lead trial counsel experience in jury and nonjury matters before the state and federal courts and before the International Trade Commission, as well as ex parte and inter partes experience in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and with non-U.S. patent and trademark authorities. He also has appellate experience before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, having appeared in 30 appeals, most of which he has argued himself.

Ken has written and lectured frequently on intellectual property law, for both U.S. and non-U.S. publications and organizations; topics he has addressed include patent claim construction, Festo/doctrine of equivalents/prosecution history estoppel, motion practice, International Trade Commission proceedings, reexamination, fraud/inequitable conduct in procuring patents, artificial intelligence and business methods protection, reissue, means plus function claim elements, combined-reference obviousness, cyberart, the best mode requirement, patent exhaustion, Internet jurisdiction, software patents, patent marking, transnational litigation and effects of non-U.S. adjudications, and trademark infringement. He also has written and lectured on a wide variety of trial, appellate and litigation issues, skills, and training topics.

Areas of Practice

• Intellectual Property
• Patent Litigation
• Patent Prosecution
• ITC Section 337
• Federal Circuit and IP Appeals
• Trial Practice
• Alternative Dispute Resolution & Mediation
• International Litigation & Arbitration
• Life Sciences

Representative Cases

• EMSAT Advanced Geo-Location Technology, LLC et al. vs. Alltel Communications LLC (N.D. Ohio 08:00821) , (2008)
• LG Philips LCD Co. Ltd. v. Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp., Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-176 (D. Del. 2007)
• Plasma Physics et al. v. Chi Mei Optoelectronics et al., Civil Action No. 2:08-cv-1628 (E.D. New York) , (2008)
• Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd v. HannStar Display, Inc., HannSpree Inc., Hannspree California Inc., 2:06-CV-190 (E.D. Tex. 2006) (TJW)
• Soverain Software LLC v. CDW, et al., Civil Action No. 6:07-cv-00511 (E.D. Tex. 2007) (LD)
• Advanced Dynamics v. Mitech, Case No. 90-0059 (N.D. Ohio/N.D. Tex. 1990)
• Allegra D. Hemphill v. The Procter & Gamble Co. et al., Case No. C-2-3736 (D. Md. 2002)
• American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. The Coast Distribution System, Inc., Civil Action No. 6-CV-04752 (N.D. Cal. 2006)
• Amsco v. Surgikos, Case No. 89-238 (N.D. Texas 1989)
• Antor Media Corporation v. Apple Computer, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, RealNetworks, Inc., Civil Action No. 2:03CV320 (E.D. Texas 2004)
• Armond D. Budish v. Harley Gordon, 784 F. Supp. 1320 (N.D. Ohio 1992)
• Arrow Int'l, Inc. v. Stuart Entm't, Civil Action No. 96CV1397 (N.D. Ohio 1999)
• Asher v. The Procter & Gamble Company, Civil Action No. Civil Action No. 1:07-cv-00339 (D. Col. 2007), 2:07-cv-04215 (D.N.J. 2007)
• Bard Mfg. Co. v. Eubank Mfg. Enter., Inc., Case No. 3:00-CV-711 (N.D. Ohio 2003)
• Cardinal American Corp. v. Jack-Post Corp., Civil Action No. 1:97CV310 (N.D. Ohio 1999)
• Charleswater Prods., Inc. v. Nevamar Corp., Appeal No. 97-1402 (Fed. Cir. 1998)
• Chevron Phillips Chem. Co. LP v. TotalFinalElf S.A., Cause No. 2002-05019 (Harris County District Court 2002)
• Dense-Pac Microsystems, Inc. v. Simple Technology, Inc., No. SACV98-822 (C.D. Cal. 1998); No. 04-1034 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
• DePuy Spine, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 469 F. 3d 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2006)
• DigCom v. Nokia, Case No. 3:00-CV-1684 (N.D. Tex. 2003)
• Douglas Press v. Arrow Int'l, Inc., Civil Action 95C3863 (N.D. Ill. 1999) and Arrow Int'l, Inc. v. Douglas Press, Civil Action No. 95 CV 2318 (N.D. Ohio 1999).
• East Texas Technology LLP v. Apple Computer, Inc. Case No. 3-04-CV-00281 (E.D. Tex 2004)
• Electro-Biology, Inc. v. Am. Medical Electronics, Inc., Civil Action No. 3-84-0630-G (N.D. Tex. 1986; Fed. Cir. 1987)
• EMI v. Picker Int’l, Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1054 (S.D.N.Y. 1987).
• Encyclopedia Britannica v. Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Civil Action No. 1:98CV00209 (D.D.C. 2001)
• epicRealm Licensing, LLC v. Herbalife, et al., civil Action No. 5:07 cv 125 / 126 / 135 (E. D. Tex. 2005)
• ETEK v. Picker Int’l, Inc., Civil Action Nos. 89-034825 and H-89-3283 (S.D. Tex. 1989)
• Exxon Chem. Patents, Inc. v. The Lubrizol Corp., Civil Action No. H-89-3203 (S.D. Tex. ), 131 F.R.D. 668 (S.D. Tex. 1990), 935 F.2d 1263, (Fed. Cir. 1991); 64 F.3d 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1020 (1996)
• F&G Scrolling Mouse v. IBM, Civil Action No. 1:99-CV-460 (M.D. N.C.)
• FAS Technologies, LLC v. Tokyo Electron Limited, Case No. 3:06-cv-02217 (N.D. Tex. 2006)
• General Electric Co., et. al. v. Whirlpool, Appeal Nos. 2007-1370 and 2007-1402 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
• Gillette Co., The RFID Tracker Ltd. v. Wal-Mart Stores, et al. Case No. 6:06 CV 363 (E.D. Tex. 2006)
• Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Nokia, Inc. and Lucent Techs., Inc., Civil Action No. 2 05 CV 151-LED (E.D. Tex. 2005)
• Golden Franchising Corp. v. KFC Corporation, Civil Action No. 3:93-CV-1901-T (N.D. Tex 1993)
• Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., et al. v. Texas Instruments, various 1998 Civil Action Nos. (E.D. Tex. and E.D. Va.)
• In re Certain Semiconductor Chips With Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same, Investigation 337-TA-605 (USITC 2007)
• In re Robertson, 169 F. 3d 743 (Fed. Cir. 1999)
• In the Matter of Certain Digital Processors and Digital Processing Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (USITC 2005)
• In the Matter of Certain Elec. Robots and Component Parts Thereof, Investigation No. 337-TA-530 (USITC 2005)
• In The Matter of Certain Engines, Components Thereof, and Products Containing The Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-585 (USITC 2007)
• In the Matter of the Application of The Procter & Gamble Company, Petitioner, For an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. SS 1782 to Take Discovery, 34 F. Supp 2d 1112 (E.D. Wisc 2004)
• Intergraph Corp. v. Dell Computer Corp., Civil Action No. 2:02CV 312 (E.D. Tex. 2002)
• Intermatic Inc. v. The Lamson & Sessions Co., 273 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir.), vacated and remanded, 535 U.S. 722 (2002), remanded, 60 Fed. Appx. 805 (2003)
• IP Innovation v. Dell Computer Corp., et al., Civil Action No. 03 C 3245 (E.D. Tex 2002, N.D. Ill. 2003)
• Key Pharmaceuticals v. Hercon Labs Corp., 161 F.3d 709 (Fed. Cir. 1998)
• Konrad v. General Motors Corp., et al. Civil Action No. 2:00-CV-21, (E.D. Tex.)
• KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., No. 04-1350 (S. Ct.)
• Molnlycke AB v. The Procter & Gamble Co., Civil Action No. 93 C 0884 (E.D. Wis. 1993)
• MOSAID Techns. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., et al., Civil Action No. 01-4340 (D. N.J. 2001) and Infineon Technologies North America Corp. et al. v. MOSAID Technologies Inc., Civil Action No. C 02 5772 (N.D. Cal. 2002)
• MOSAID Techs., Inc. v. Infineon Techs. North America, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:05 CV 120 (E.D. Tex. 2005)
• Motionless Keyboard Co. v. Nokia Inc., 05-1497, Fed. Cir.
• Motionless Keyboard Co. v. Nokia Inc., Case No. 04-CV-180-AA (D. Or. 2004)
• Motorola, Inc. and Freescale Semiconductors, Inc. v. STMicroelectronics, N.V. et al., Case No. 1:03-CV-0407 (E.D. Tex. 2003)
• Nastoff's .45 Shop, Inc. v. Colt's Mfg., Civil Action No. 4:97CV1784 (N.D. Ohio 1997)
• National Instruments Corp. v. The MathWorks, Inc., Civil Action No. 2:01-CV-011 (E.D. Tex 2001)
• Nestlé Purina PetCare Co. v. Clorox Co., et al., Case No. 03-664 (D. Del. 2003)
• Nestlé USA et al. v. Sara Lee Bakery Group, Case No. 1:01CV2074 (N.D. Ohio 2001)
• Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc. v. Extreme Networks, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 6:08-cv-030 LED
• New NGC Inc, d/b/a National Gypsum Company vs. Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC (W.D.N.C. 08:00422)
• Novozymes A/S v. Genencor Int’l., Inc., Civil Action No. 05-160 (D. Del 2005)
• Olan Mills, Inc. v. Senior Wallet Photos, Inc., Civil Action No. CA 3-88-2739D; 89-948 (N.D. Tex., D.N.J. 1990).
• Olin Corp. v. Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd., 66USPQ 2d 1786 (D. Conn. 2003); 73 USPQ 2d 1317 (D. Conn 2004)
• Orion IP, LLC v. Ford Motor Co., et al., Civil Action No. 2:04-CV-313 (JTW) (E.D. Tex. 2004)
• PE Corp. v. Affymetrix, 00 629 SLR (D. Del. 2001)
• Perseptive Biosystems, Inc. v. Pharmacia Biotech, Inc., 225 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
• Phillips Petroleum v. Hoechst Celanese Corp., et al., Case No. 88-0618 (D. Del. 1988) and In re Phenylene Sulfide Polymers and Prods. ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-296 (USITC 1989)
• Picker Int’l, Inc. v. Blanton, 756 F. Supp. 971 (N.D. Tex. 1990)
• Picker Int’l, Inc. v. Philips Ultrasound, (S.D. Ohio 1985)
• Picker Int’l, Inc. v. Varian Associates, Inc., 869 F.2d 878 (Fed. Cir. 1989)
• Picker Int'l, Inc. v. Mayo Foundation, No 95 CV 2028 (N.D. Ohio 1998)
• Pizza Hut v. Little Caesars, Civil Action No. 89-CV-707 48 (E.D. Mich., S.D. Tex. 1989)
• Playtex Products, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Company, Civil Action No. 08 cv 3417 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)
• Pressco v. Ball, Case No. 90-110 (N.D. Ohio 1990)
• PSN Illinois, LLC. v. Nestlé Purina PetCare Co., Civil Action No. 1:05 CV 2302 (N.D. Ill. 2005)
• RFID Tracker Ltd. v. Wal-Mart, et al., Civil Action No. 6:06-cv-363 (E.D. Tex. 2006).
• Rhône-Poulenc Specialties Chimiques v. SCM Corp., 769 F.2d 1569 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
• Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. v. American Electric Power, Inc. et al., USDC, ED TX 5:06-CV-00188-DF-CMC
• Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. v. Chevron Corporation, et al., USDC, ED TX 9:06-CV-00178-RHC
• Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. v. Genesys Conferencing, Inc. et al., USDC, ED TX 5:06-CV-00187-DF
• Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. v. Regions Financial Corporation, et al., USDC, ED TX 9:06-CV-00201-RHC
• SABIC v. ECAI and Mobil Yanbu, Case No. 00C-07-161-JRJ (Del. Superior Court 2000)
• SABIC v. ExxonMobil Corporation, Civil Action No. 98-4897 (WHW) (D.N.J. 1998)
• Samsung Electronics v. ON Semiconductor, Civil Action No. 1:06-cv-00720 (D. Del. 2006); On Semiconductor v. Samsung Electronics, Civil Action No. 6:06-cv-00523 (E. D. Tex. 2006) , (2008)
• Soverain Software LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex. 2005)
• STMicroelectronics v. Motorola and Freescale Semiconductor, Case No. 4:03-CV-276 and Motorola v. Analog Devices, Inc., Case No. 1:03-CV-131 (E.D. Tex 2003)
• Sturtevant et al. v. Van Remortel et al., Civil Action No. 93 CIV 3466 (S.D. NY 1995)
• Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Hand Held Products, Inc., C.A. No. 03-102 (SLR) (D. Del 2003)
• Syrelec v. Pass & Seymour, Inc., 869 F.2d 838 (5th Cir. 1989)
• Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa Int’l, Inc., Civil Action No. 98-73335 (E.D. Mich 2000)
• Tessera v. Texas Instruments, Inc, No. C 00:02114 CW (N.D. Cal. 2000); In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package SizeInv. 337-TA-432 (USITC 2000); and Texas Instruments v. Tessera, 2:01CV163 (TJW) (E.D. Tex. 2001)
• Texas Industries, Inc. v. Southdown, Inc. Case No. 99-2646 GA (N.D. Tex 1999)
• Texas Instruments Inc. v. Analog Devices, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 3-90-1590-H (N.D. Tex. 1995)
• Texas Instruments v. Linear Tech. Corp.; various Civil Action Nos. (E.D. Tex.)
• Texas Instruments, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., et al., Civil Action Nos. 2:96-CV-1 and 2:96-CV-2 (E.D. Tex.)
• The B.F. Goodrich Co. v. Hercules Inc., Case No. 1:89 CV 2435 (N.D. Ohio 1989)
• The Dow Chemical Co. v. Packaging Indus., Inc., Civil Action No. 90 CV 787 (N.D. N.Y. 1990)
• The Gillette Co. + Braun GmbH v. Ranir, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-186 (S.D. Ohio 2006)
• The Lubrizol Corporation v. Exxon Corporation, 696 F. Supp. 302 (N.D. Ohio 1988); 104 F.R.D. 583 (N.D. Ohio 1985)
• The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Clorox Co., Case No. C-1-99-570 (S.D. Ohio 2000)
• The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Oraceutical LLC, et al., Case No. C-1-03-433 (S.D. Ohio 2003)
• The Procter & Gamble Co. v. PerCara Enterprises, Inc., Civil Action No. 06-1070 (N.D. Ohio 2006)
• The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Reckitt Benckiser, Inc., Case No. C-1-0112 (S.D. Ohio 2000)
• The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Unilever PLC, Civil Action Nos. 3:98-CV-955 (D. Conn. 1998) (S.D. Ohio 1998) (N.D. Ga. 1998) (D.N.J. 1998)
• The Timken Co. v. AM General Corp., U.S. District Ct., Case No. 5:91 CV 3203 (N.D. Ohio 1991)
• The Timken Co. v. SKF,Civil Action No. 99-CV-37 (E.D. Pa. 1999)
• Trounson Automation, LLC v. Yaskawa Elec. Corp., et al., Civil Action No. 05-355 (E.D. Tex. 2006)
• Vishay Dale Electronics, Inc. v. KOA Corp., et al.Civ. A. 302 CV 184 (SRU) (N.D. Tex., E.D. Pa. 2004)
• Witold A. Ziarno v. The American Red Cross, IBM Corporation and Cable News Network, Civil Action No. 99-C-3430 (N.D. Ill.)

West Practice Categories

Bankruptcy Litigation, Class Actions, Complex Litigation, Copyrights, Federal Appellate Practice, Federal Claims Court, Federal Trial Practice, Intellectual Property Law, International Intellectual Property, International Trade Litigation, Litigation & Appeals, Military & Veterans Appeals, Multidistrict Litigation, Patent Litigation, Patents, State Appellate Practice, State Trial Practice, Tax Litigation, Technology Licensing, Trade Dress, Trade Secrets, Trademarks, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, US Supreme Court

Bar Admissions

• Illinois
• New York
• Ohio
• Texas

Education

• Albany Law School

Published Works

• Patent Eligible Subject Matter Revisited: Tracking the Development of Business Method Patentability, coauthor, Patent World, Issue 208, p. 18., 2008
• Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Revisited: In re Bilski, 2008
• The Curse of "Copying," The Review of Intellectual Property Law, 2008
• Who Owns the Patents Covering a Company's Technology? Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 2008
• The Changing Global Landscape Requires Flexibility and Creativity in United States Patent Enforcement, 2007
• Patent Reform Act of 2007: Bill Proposing Fundamental Changes to the Patent System (H.R. 1908) (S. 1145), 2007
• Reigning supreme, More uniformity to patent laws, coauthor, Patent World Issue 190, 2007
• Reigning Supreme Over The U.S. Patent System, coauthor, BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, vol. 72, no. 1786 at 550, 2006
• Jones Day's Intellectual Property Practice, 2006
• U.S. House of Representatives Proposes Sweeping Changes in the Patent Reform Act (H.R. 2795), 2005
• Federal District Court in Pittsburgh Adopts Specialized Local Rules for Patent Cases, 2005
• Document Discovery in Patent Litigation, coauthor, 2004 Supplement to BNA/ABA Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook, Chapter 9, 2004
• Preserving Errors for Appeal in the U.S., 156 Patent World (U.K.) 22, 2003
• Survey of the Federal Circuit’s Patent Law Decisions in 2000: Y2K in Review, 50 American University Law Review 1435, 2001

Address

North Point
901 Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44114-1190

Phones

1.216.586.7120 / 1.214.969.4856 (Dallas) (Business Phone)
1.216.632.9537 (Mobile Phone)

Faxes

1.216.579.0212 / 1.214.969.5100 (Business Fax)

Emails

Contact Us (Business Email)

Websites

http://www.jonesday.com