Eric Caligiuri

Of Counsel


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

San Diego Super Lawyers, Intellectual Property Litigation “Rising Star”, 2015 to 2019

 

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

 

Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Selected for Inclusion in San Diego Super Lawyers/Rising Stars® 2019 List

Weintraub is pleased to announce that Jo Dale Carothers has been recognized as a 2019 San Diego Super Lawyer and Eric Caligiuri as a 2019 Rising Star. Jo Dale Carothers is a shareholder and chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property group.

Read More

37 Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Named Among 2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Super Lawyers has released its Northern California, Southern California and San Diego lists of outstanding attorneys for 2018, on which 37 Weintraub Tobin attorneys have been included. Five Weintraub Tobin attorneys received special recognition as a Top 25 Sacramento Super Lawyer.

Read More

36 Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Named Among 2017 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Super Lawyers has released its Northern California, Southern California, and San Diego lists of outstanding attorneys for 2017, on which 36 Weintraub Tobin attorneys have been included. Six Weintraub Tobin attorneys received special recognition as a Top 25 Sacramento Super Lawyer.

Read More

Four Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Recognized as “Rising Stars” in Southern California

Weintraub Tobin, one of California’s leading, full-service law firms, is pleased to announce that Eric Caligiuri, Jacob Gonzales, Jessica Marlow, and Darrell White  have been named to the 2017 Southern California “Rising Stars” list.

Read More

Four Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Recognized as “SuperLawyers” in Southern California

LOS ANGELES, CA (January 20, 2017) – Weintraub Tobin, one of California’s leading, full-service law firms, is pleased to announce that Eric Caligiuri, Jo Dale Carothers, David R. Gabor, and Gary Waldron have been named to the 2017 Southern California “SuperLawyers” list.

Read More

33 Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Named Among 2016 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Super Lawyers has released its Northern California, Southern California, and San Diego lists of outstanding attorneys for 2016, on which 33 Weintraub Tobin attorneys have been included. Three Weintraub Tobin attorneys received special honors in their respective regions.

Read More

Google’s Fair Use Defense Thwarts Oracle’s Attempt to Recover $9 Billion in Copyright Case

In a high-profile case, a jury recently found that Google’s use of portions of Oracle’s Java software code was allowable under the fair use doctrine and thus did not constitute copyright infringement. 

Read More

37 Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Named Among 2015 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Super Lawyers has released its Northern California, Southern California, and San Diego lists of outstanding attorneys for 2015, on which 37 Weintraub Tobin attorneys have been included. Eight Weintraub Tobin attorneys received special honors in their respective regions.

Read More

On the Move

By: Jason Doiy, The Recorder Intellectual property lawyer Eric Caliguiri joined Weintraub Tobin as of counsel in San Diego. Caligiuri departed Covington & Burling, following shareholder Jo Dale Carothers. Read entire article here.

Read More

Caligiuri Joins Weintraub Tobin as Of Counsel

By: Daily Transcript Staff Report Eric Caligiuri has joined Weintraub Tobin’s San Diego office as of counsel. Caligiuri advises domestic and international clients on complex intellectual property disputes and focuses on patent and trade secret litigation in federal district courts,

Read More

Eric Caligiuri Joins Weintraub Tobin’s San Diego Office, Further Enhances IP Capabilities

SAN DIEGO (March 31, 2015) – Weintraub Tobin, one of California’s leading, full service law firms, is pleased to announce that intellectual property attorney Eric Caligiuri has joined the firm’s San Diego office as Of Counsel.

Read More

District Court Applies Different Requirement for Similarity of Accused and Asserted Works Under DMCA Versus the Copyright Act

In Kirk Kara Corp. v. Western Stone & Metal Corp. et al, 2-20-cv-01931 (CDCA 2020-08-14, Order) (Dolly M. Gee), the Central District of California denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims for copyright infringement,

Read More

Irreparable Harm for Permanent Injunction Supported by Lost Profits Award

In f’real Foods, LLC et al v. Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. et al, 1-16-cv-00041 (DDE 2020-07-16, Order) (Colm F. Connolly), plaintiffs freal Foods, LLC and Rich Products Corporation sued defendants Hamilton Beach Brands,

Read More

Southern District of New York Court Orders “All Remote” Bench Trial

In Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al v. Serenity Pharmaceuticals, LLC et al, 1-17-cv-09922 (SDNY 2020-05-27, Order), Chief Judge C.J. McMahon of the Southern District of New York ordered an upcoming bench trial set to begin on July 6,

Read More

District Court Stays Discovery Deadlines Because of Coronavirus Threat but Keeps Markman Hearing on Calendar

On March 6, 2020, a Central District Court in UPL NA Inc. f/k/a United Phosphorous, Inc. v. Tide International (USA), Inc. et al, 8-19-cv-01201 (CDCA 2020-03-06, Order) (Ronald S.W. Lew), issued an order that may become more common place across courts. 

Read More

Inequitable Conduct Can Render all Patents in a Patent Family Unenforceable through Infectious Unenforceability

In Guardant Health, Inc. v. Foundation Medicine, Inc., 1-17-cv-01616 (DDE 2020-01-07, Order), the Court rejected the Plaintiff’s argument that an inequitable conduct claim must be related only to the prosecution of the patent-at-issue in ruling on plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendants’ infectious unenforceability counterclaims. 

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes down USPTO’s Request for Attorney’s Fees

In a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court in Peter v. NantKwest, case number 18-801, struck down the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) recent and often-criticized effort to recoup its legal fees –

Read More

Federal Circuit Holds Administrative Patent Judges Appointments Unconstitutional

In Arthrex Inc. v. Smith & Nephew Inc. et al., case number 18-2140, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently considered whether the appointment of the Board’s Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) by the Secretary of Commerce,

Read More

Federal Circuit Holds That Claim Language Can Limit the Scope of a Design Patent

In Curver Luxembourg SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., case number 18-2214, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that the claim language of a design patent can limit its scope where the claim language supplies the only instance of an article of manufacture that appears nowhere in the figures.

Read More

Federal Circuit Holds IPR Proceedings on Pre-AIA Patents is Not an Unconstitutional Taking Under the Fifth Amendment

In CELGENE CORPORATION v. PETER, the Federal Circuit recently affirmed the PTAB’s decisions finding appealed claims obvious. However, more importantly, the Federal Circuit also held that the retroactive application of IPR proceedings to pre-AIA patents is not an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment.

Read More

Federal Circuit Sets Higher Standard for Early Alice Motions

In Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc. et. al., the Federal Circuit recently held that a lower court wrongly invalidated four patents under Alice because they contain an inventive concept. The four patents at issue share the same specification and generally relate to connecting a data capture device,

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Allows App Store Anti-Trust Class Action to Proceed Against Apple

In APPLE INC. v. PEPPER ET AL., case number 17-204, the United States Supreme Court considered a case alleging Apple has monopolized the retail market for the sale of apps and has unlawfully used its monopolistic power to charge consumers higher-than competitive prices.

Read More

Attorney Fees for Successful Defense of IPR May Not Be Recovered as Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284

On March 25, 2018, the District Court in Nichia Corporation v. VIZIO, Inc., Case No. 8-16-cv-00545 (CACD 2019-03-25, Order), granted defendant’s motion to preclude plaintiff’s damages expert from testifying that plaintiff should recover,

Read More

The Federal Circuit Clarifies Rules For Importation of Limitations From the Specification During Claim Construction

In Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corp. et al., case number 18-1076, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a precedential opinion, recently clarified the rules for the incorporation of a limitation from a patent’s specifications into the claims during claim construction. 

Read More

District Court Rules Certain Prior Art References Are Precluded Under IPR Estoppel

On December 28, 2018, the Court in The California Institute of Technology v. Broadcom Limited et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-03714-GW-(AGRx), issued a Final Ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Validity under 35 U.S.C.

Read More

Court Finds No Personal Jurisdiction Over Foreign Defendant Based On U.S. Subsidiary Under Stream of Commerce and Agency Theories

In University of Massachusetts Medical School et al v. L’Oreal SA et al, 1-17-cv-00868 (DED 2018-11-13, Order) (Sherry R. Fallon), the magistrate judge recommended granting a foreign parent company defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ patent infringement action for lack of personal jurisdiction where its American subsidiary introduced the alleged accused products into the stream of commerce and the foreign defendant’s corporate structure is not sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction because “mere ownership of a subsidiary does not justify the imposition of liability on the parent.” The primary plaintiff in the case is the University of Massachusetts Medical School,

Read More

District Court Grants Motion For More Definitive Statement Because Patent Infringement Claim Involved Complicated Technology

In Lexington Luminance LLC v. Service Lighting and Electrical Supplies, Inc. d/b/a 1000bulbs.com, 3-18-cv-01074, the District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim,

Read More

Court Finds Prior Finding of No Literal Infringement Bars Later Claim for Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents

In Galderma Laboratories, LP et al v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC et al, 1-16-cv-00207 (DED August 31, 2018, Order) (Stark, USDJ), Judge Stark of the District of Delaware recently found that a plaintiff was collaterally estopped from pursuing claims for patent infringement of two drug patents under a doctrine of equivalents theory based on a finding of no literal infringement in a prior case even though a doctrine of equivalents theory was not asserted in that case.

Read More

Federal Circuit Affirms Tribal Immunity Does Not Apply in Inter Partes Review Proceedings Before the USPTO

In Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Native American tribal sovereign immunity does not apply in Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) arm of the USPTO.

Read More

SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu Has Affected Cases in Federal Courts in Addition to Those at the PTAB

On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, which held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) arm of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) must issue a final written decision addressing each and every patent claim challenged in an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) petition if review is granted.

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Rules America Invents Acts Reviews by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board arm of the Patent and Trademark Office are Constitutional

In a 7-2 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES, LLC v. GREENE’S ENERGY GROUP, LLC that inter partes review does not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution.

Read More

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Finds Defendants Have Not Committed Acts of Infringement Sufficient to Establish Venue

The U.S. Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017 ruling in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods held that personal jurisdiction alone does not convey venue for patent cases under the patent venue statute.

Read More

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Makes Rare FRAND Royalty Rate Determination

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently issued its opinion in TCL Communications v. Ericsson (SACV 14-341 JVS(DFMx) and CV 15-2370 JVS (DFMx)) on standard-essential patents and whether a commit to license them was on terms that are fair,

Read More

Federal Circuit Clarifies Waiver of Venue Issue in Light of TC Heartland, but Issues Still Remain For District Courts to Address

The U.S. Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017 ruling in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods held that personal jurisdiction alone does not convey venue for patent cases under the patent venue statute. 

Read More

Allegan’s Restasis Patents Invalidated by a Federal District Court Even After Transfer to Native American Tribe and Sovereign Immunity Claim.

In Allergan, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al, Case No. 2:15-cv-1455-WCB (EDTX October 16, 2017 Order), a Federal District Court recently invalidated several patents covering Allergan’s dry-eye drug Restasis. 

Read More

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.

In Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Amazon.com, Inc., 3-17-cv-03022 (CAND August 24, 2017, Order) (Tigar, USDJ) the United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently denied plaintiff Eolas Technologies Incorporated’s (“Eolas”) motion to disqualify its former counsel,

Read More

Repeated Discovery Failures and Abusive Litigation Tactics Warrant Terminating Sanctions, Treble Damages, Attorney Fees and Permanent Injunction Against Defendant In Patent Litigation Case.

In TASER International, Inc. v. PhaZZer Electronics, Inc. et al, 6-16-cv-00366 (FLMD July 21, 2017, Order), a Florida District Court took the drastic step of entering a default judgment in favor of Plaintiff Taser,

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Allows Early Notice For Biosimilars

In SANDOZ INC. v. AMGEN INC. et al., the United States Supreme Court in a unanimous opinion ruled that biosimilar makers can give their required 180-day statutory notice of sales before their products win approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). 

Read More

Federal Circuit Holds Non-Public Sales Can Still Satisfy the On-Sale Bar for Patents under the AIA

In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently ruled that the America Invents Act’s (“AIA”) did not change the meaning of the on-sale bar provision in 35 U.S.C.

Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Laches Defense in Patent Cases

In SCA Hygiene Products AB et al. v. First Quality Baby Products LLC et al., the United States Supreme Court held that laches cannot be invoked as a defense against a claim for patent infringement damages brought within U.S.C §286’s 6-year limitations period. 

Read More

Northern District of California Revises Local Patent Rules

On January 17, 2017, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued revisions to its Local Patent Rules requiring early disclosure of damages-related discovery and contentions. The revised rules are effective immediately in all patent cases pending in the Northern District. 

Read More

Law Firm Survives Disqualification Motion in Florida Patent Infringement Lawsuit

In Lanard Toys Limited v. Toys “R” Us, Inc. et al, 3-15-cv-00849 (FLMD December 16, 2016, Order) (Barksdale, MJ), a patent infringement matter in Florida District Court, the court denied defendants’ motion to disqualify plaintiff’s new counsel for simultaneously representing defendant in an unrelated case. 

Read More

Federal Circuit Takes A Common Law Approach to “Abstract Idea” Determinations in Alice Cases

In Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. v. Openet Telecom Inc. et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently upheld four software patents against a patent-eligibility challenge, finding that the patents do not claim an “abstract idea.”  The patent challenge was under the frame work set out by the U.S.

Read More

Federal Circuit Rules the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Can Consider New Evidence During AIA Review Trial

On September 26, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to review in a unanimous en banc decision a panel Federal Circuit decision affirming that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) at the Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) could hear new evidence during a trial,

Read More

Federal Circuit Holds the PTAB Must Apply Narrower Phillips Claim Construction Standard to Patents that Expire During Pendency of Re-exam

In In re CSB-System Int’l, Inc., No. 15-1832 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2016), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that patents that expire during a pending re-examination before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) should be examined under the Phillips standard of claim  construction,

Read More

En Banc Federal Circuit Rules A Product Must be the Subject of a Commercial Sale or Offer for Sale to Trigger On-Sale Bar

On July 11, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a unanimous en banc decision in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira Inc., Federal Circuit case number 2014-1469,

Read More

Google’s Fair Use Defense Thwarts Oracle’s Attempt to Recover $9 Billion in Copyright Case

In a high-profile case, a jury recently found that Google’s use of portions of Oracle’s Java software code was allowable under the fair use doctrine and thus did not constitute copyright infringement. 

Read More

Court Orders Plaintiff to Pay Defendants’ $8 Million in Attorney’s Fees in Patent Row

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s twin 2014 decisions in Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc. and Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. attorney’s fees awards are becoming more common in patent cases. 

Read More

Apple Argues It Should Not Be Compelled to Write Software for the F.B.I.

On February 16, 2016, Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym in the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued an order compelling Apple, Inc. to provide technical assistance to the F.B.I.

Read More