In the News

Mealey's Litigation Report Notes Important Work of Steve Levitan and Jason Gonder

A failure by counsel for a patent plaintiff to adequately investigate its allegation of infringement led a North Carolina federal judge on July 13 to deem the case exceptional for purposes of an award of attorney fees (Precision Links Inc. v. USA Products Group Inc. and Home Depot Inc., No. 08-576, W.D. N.C.). >>



Recent Publications

The Status Quo Wins: Clear and Convincing Proof is Still Required to Invalidate Patent Claims

The Supreme Court ruled last week in Microsoft Corporation v. i4i Limited Partnership that “clear and convincing evidence” is still the standard of proof required to invalidate a patent. >>



Steve Levitan

Partner

Silicon Valley


2033 Gateway Place
Suite 300
San Jose, California 95110
T +1 408.660.4152
F +1 408.660.4252

Areas of Practice

Education

  • J.D., University of Michigan Law School, cum laude
  • B.A., History, Stanford University

Bar Admissions

  • California

Steve Levitan, a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the Silicon Valley office of Haynes and Boone, specializes in intellectual property litigation and licensing. Steve has extensive experience in patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, misappropriation, antitrust, unfair competition, false advertising, indemnification, and technology contract disputes. His litigation experience encompasses trial and appellate work in federal courts, California and Oregon state courts, and the United States International Trade Commission, as well as arbitrations conducted by the International Chamber of Commerce and the American Arbitration Association. Steve also is experienced in trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and UDRP (domain name) arbitration proceedings. Steve has negotiated numerous intellectual property license agreements as well as technology development and transfer agreements.

Steve serves as a court-appointed arbitrator for the Santa Clara County Superior Court.

Representative experience includes:

  • Represented U.S., Korean, and Taiwanese semiconductor chip designers and manufacturers in district court and ITC patent infringement lawsuits involving front- and back-end manufacturing processes and circuit design technology;
  • Represented a U.S. underground cable and pipe locator company in defense of ITC patent infringement litigation;
  • Represented a U.S. HSP modem provider in patent and antitrust litigation;
  • Represented a U.S. tie-down strap supplier and retail chain in defense of patent infringement litigation involving cargo straps;
  • Represented a U.S. semiconductor processing equipment company in a breach of contract and fraud arbitration, and IP and technology transfer transactions;
  • Represented a U.S. dietary supplement company in patent litigation, nationwide trademark enforcement, advertising review and clearance, and IP transactions;
  • Represented a U.S. VoIP telephony service provider in trademark litigation;
  • Represented a U.S. server and workstation company in antitrust and copyright litigation;
  • Represented a U.S. computer systems integrator in a trade name infringement suit;
  • Represented an inventor/consultant in a breach of contract arbitration action against a laser device manufacturer; and
  • Represented a software company in one of the first cases brought under California's Internet "anti-spam" law.

Memberships

  • State Bar of California
  • Santa Clara County Bar Association

Online Publications

06/13/2011 - The Status Quo Wins: Clear and Convincing Proof is Still Required to Invalidate Patent Claims
The Supreme Court ruled last week in Microsoft Corporation v. i4i Limited Partnership that “clear and convincing evidence” is still the standard of proof required to invalidate a patent.