Eric Caligiuri

Of Counsel

Location

Practice Areas

Bar Admissions

Experience

 

Affiliations

 

Education

 

News

 

Blog

Experience

Eric Caligiuri advises domestic and international clients through complex intellectual property disputes. Mr. Caligiuri’s practice focuses on patent and trade secret litigation in federal district courts, California state courts, and before the International Trade Commission (ITC). He has experience representing companies in a wide range of fields, including semiconductor products and processes, mobile device components and applications, networking, and systems-on-a-chip (SoC’s). Mr. Caligiuri also has experience handling employment and commercial litigation matters. Mr. Caligiuri is admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and has experience with patent and trademark prosecution. Prior to attending law school, Mr. Caligiuri worked as an engineer.

Representative Matters

Note: confidential matters advising clients on pre-litigation IP issues, third-party subpoenas, licensing agreements, and patent prosecution issues cannot be listed, but the following list shows representative litigation matters.

  • Magnacross v. Novatel Wireless, Inc. (TXED). Representation of Novatel in patent litigation involving wireless data transmission systems.
  • CalAmp Wireless Networks v. Novatel Wireless, Inc. and Enfora, Inc. (TX State Court, 14th Judicial District, Dallas County). Representation of Novatel and Enfora in a contract dispute.
  • Envisiontec, Inc. v. Formlabs, Inc. (CACD). Representation of Formlabs in patent litigation involving 3D printing.
  • Representation of Novatel Wireless in a two-patent litigation concerning manufacturing/assembly of IC chips. Anza Technology, Inc. V. Novatel Wireless (CASD)
  • Representation of REGEN/Encycle in patent litigation involving energy management. REGEN Energy Inc. (now Encycle Corporation) v. eCurv, Inc., (CASD).
  • Representation of Silicon Storage Technology in an insurance coverage matter arising from settlement of trade secret litigation. Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA et al., (CAND).
  • Representation of respondent Entropic Communications in a four- patent ITC investigation concerning set-top boxes, gateways, and in-home networking. Obtained complete dismissal of the ITC investigation during fact discovery. Certain Set-Top Boxes, Gateways, Bridges, And Adapters And Components Thereof (ITC).
  • Representation of respondent Samsung entities in a six-patent ITC investigation concerning smartphones, smart TVs, and applications relating to sharing media and location-based services. Representation lasted from institution through the post-hearing proceedings, during which the Commission determined that Samsung did not infringe any asserted claim, and that several of the asserted claims are invalid. Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets, And Mobile Phones, Components Thereof, And Associated Software (ITC).
  • Representation of plaintiff and complainant Peregrine Semiconductor in a multi-patent litigation involving radio frequency switch devices in matters brought in the ITC and the Southern District of California. Assisted in securing a favorable settlement for Peregrine. Certain Radio Frequency Integrated Circuits and Devices Containing Same (ITC) and Peregrine Semiconductor v. RF Micro Devices (S.D. Cal).
  • Representation of defendant Texas Instruments in a patent infringement action involving systems-on-a-chip in the District of Delaware. Won summary judgment of non-infringement on the majority of claims and a stipulation of non-infringement under the court’s claim construction for the remaining claims. Ruling affi rmed by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. Cradle IP, LLC v. Texas Instruments Incorporated (D. Del).
  • Representation of plaintiff Entropic Communications in patent litigation involving three standard essential Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) patents in the Southern District of California. Entropic Communications, Inc. v. ViXS Systems, Inc. (S.D. Cal.).
  • Representation of defendant Entropic Communications in a five patent litigation involving automatic content recognition hardware and software brought in the Eastern District of Texas. Secured favorable dismissal without prejudice during fact discovery. Blue Spike, LLC v. Entropic Communications, Inc. (E.D. Tex).
  • Representation of plaintiff Silicon Storage Technology in patent litigation relating to process technology for memory devices in the Northern District of California. Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. v. Telefunken Semiconductors (N.D. Cal.).
  • Representation of plaintiff and counter-defendant Invenger Technologies in a trade secret matter in the Central District of California involving mobile payment technology. Invenger Technologies, Inc. v. Enservio, Inc. (C.D. Cal.).
  • Representation of plaintiff Weiland Sliding Doors and Windows in multipatent infringement action in S. D. Cal. involving mechanical device hardware. Weiland Sliding Doors and Windows, Inc. v. Panda Windows and Doors, LLC (S.D. Cal.).
  • Provide trademark guidance and prosecution for clients.

Previous Experience
Litigation associate at large national and international law firms
(2008-2015)

Publications and Speeches
“The EEOC’s Final Regulations Under the ADAAA: How These Changes Will Affect Internal Policies and Procedures of Municipalities and Other
Employers,” Municipal Lawyer Magazine (November/December 2011), Author

Education

J.D., cum laude, University of San Diego Law School, 2008

Order of the Coif

M.Sc., honors with distinction, California State University, Northridge, Materials Engineering, 2005

B.S., University of California, San Diego, Mechanical Engineering, 2002

 

News

Blog

Court Finds Prior Finding of No Literal Infringement Bars Later Claim for Infringement Under the Doctrine of EquivalentsFederal Circuit Affirms Tribal Immunity Does Not Apply in Inter Partes Review Proceedings Before the USPTOSAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu Has Affected Cases in Federal Courts in Addition to Those at the PTABU.S. Supreme Court Rules America Invents Acts Reviews by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board arm of the Patent and Trademark Office are ConstitutionalU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Finds Defendants Have Not Committed Acts of Infringement Sufficient to Establish VenueView All Blogs

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Makes Rare FRAND Royalty Rate DeterminationFederal Circuit Clarifies Waiver of Venue Issue in Light of TC Heartland, but Issues Still Remain For District Courts to AddressAllegan’s Restasis Patents Invalidated by a Federal District Court Even After Transfer to Native American Tribe and Sovereign Immunity Claim.Court Denies Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify its Former Counsel as Counsel for Defendant in a Patent Litigation Action After Plaintiff Delayed Filing its Disqualification Motion for Over A Year After Discovering the Conflict.Repeated Discovery Failures and Abusive Litigation Tactics Warrant Terminating Sanctions, Treble Damages, Attorney Fees and Permanent Injunction Against Defendant In Patent Litigation Case.U.S. Supreme Court Allows Early Notice For BiosimilarsFederal Circuit Holds Non-Public Sales Can Still Satisfy the On-Sale Bar for Patents under the AIAU.S. Supreme Court Limits Laches Defense in Patent CasesNorthern District of California Revises Local Patent RulesLaw Firm Survives Disqualification Motion in Florida Patent Infringement LawsuitFederal Circuit Takes A Common Law Approach to “Abstract Idea” Determinations in Alice CasesWeintraub Tobin’s L&E and IP Blogs recognized as “Top 100 Legal Blogs” By Feedspot Blog ReaderFederal Circuit Rules the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Can Consider New Evidence During AIA Review TrialFederal Circuit Holds the PTAB Must Apply Narrower Phillips Claim Construction Standard to Patents that Expire During Pendency of Re-examEn Banc Federal Circuit Rules A Product Must be the Subject of a Commercial Sale or Offer for Sale to Trigger On-Sale BarGoogle’s Fair Use Defense Thwarts Oracle’s Attempt to Recover $9 Billion in Copyright CaseCourt Orders Plaintiff to Pay Defendants’ $8 Million in Attorney’s Fees in Patent RowApple Argues It Should Not Be Compelled to Write Software for the F.B.I.

Affiliations

San Diego Super Lawyers, Intellectual Property Litigation “Rising Star”, 2015-2017

San Diego Super Lawyer, 2017