Übersicht

Michael Lindinger is a senior associate in the Intellectual Property group of Mayer Brown's Washington DC office. His practice focuses on patent litigation in federal district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and proceedings before the US Patent and Trademark Office.

Michael has litigated patent disputes in numerous technical areas including electrical arts, mechanical arts, and business methods, and is experienced in managing complex multi‐defendant litigations from filing to trial.  He has argued at a jury trial, claim construction hearings, and before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals multiple times, second chaired multiple jury trials, and is experienced in pretrial discovery including depositions, expert reports, and motion practice.

Michael has also litigated other complex class action and false advertising matters.

Before entering law school, Michael worked for three years as a patent examiner at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO). While at the USPTO, he examined patent applications in the fields of circuit board and time-keeping technologies.

During law school, he served as a staff editor for the John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law. He also served as a judicial extern to the Honorable Thomas E. Hoffman of the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District in Chicago, Illinois.

Michael has been recognized as a DC Super Lawyers Rising Star three times (2014, 2015, 2016) for Intellectual Property.

Sprachkenntnisse

  • Englisch

Erfahrung

  • Hitachi Maxell, Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. et al.  Representing Hitachi Maxell in assertion of eight patents in the E.D. Texas related to features incorporated in smart phones including wireless communications, GPS components, power management, and other functionality.
  • Hitachi Maxell, Ltd. v. ZTE Corp. et al. Representing Hitachi Maxell in a patent infringement case involving the assertion of eight patents in the E.D. Texas related to various features of smart phones including audio compression, image processing, wireless communications, and location based services.
  • Maxell, Ltd. v. Fandango Media, LLC. Representing Hitachi Maxell in a patent infringement case involving the assertion of seven patents in the C.D. California related to streaming services, including digital content management and decryption.
  • Capital Security Systems v. NCR Corporation, et al. Defending NCR and its customers in a four-patent case involving envelope free deposit/check imaging technology in the N.D. Georgia.  Plaintiff stipulated to noninfringement as to some claims after claim construction, and the court granted summary judgment of invalidity on the remaining claims.  The case is currently on appeal.
  • St. Isidore Research, LLC v. Comerica Inc., et al.  Defending LegacyTexas Group in a multi-patent patent case involving mobile banking technology in the E.D. Texas.
  • Delaware Display Group LLC v. LG Electronics.  Defended LGE and LG Display in a multi-patent case involving LED backlight technology in the District of Delaware. 
  • Changzhou Kaidi Electrical Co. v. Okin America, Inc.  Represented Kaidi in a declaratory judgment patent action involving linear actuator technology in the District of Maryland.  The jury returned a verdict of noninfringement for Kaidi.
  • IPEG Limited Liability Co. v. Valley National Bank.  Defended Valley National in a multi-patent patent case involving mobile banking technology in the E.D. Texas.
  • Anuwave LLC litigation.  Defended financial institutions in patent cases involving mobile banking technology in the E.D. Texas.
  • Impulse Technology Ltd. v. Microsoft.  Represented plaintiff in a multi-patent matter involving motion capture and imaging technology in the District of Delaware.
  • Impulse Technology Ltd. v. Nintendo.  Represented plaintiff in a patent case involving motion capture and imaging technology in the N.D. Ohio.
  • Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronics North America Corp.  Defended Philips in a multi-patent infringement case related to pulse oximetry technology in the District of Delaware.
  • Pro Bono
    • Multiple 7th Circuit Court of Appeals appointments for habeas corpus matters, each involving briefing on the merits and oral arguments.
    • Landlord tenant matter involving a multi-day evidentiary hearing that Mr. Lindinger first chaired and ultimately settled on favorable terms for nearly three dozen tenants.

Ausbildung

The John Marshall Law School, JD, cum laude

Associate Justice, Moot Court Honors Board, 2006-2007. The John Marshall Law School Review of Intellectual Property Law (RIPL), Staff Editor

Purdue University, BS, Mechanical Engineering

Zulassung

Bar

  • District of Columbia
  • Illinois

Gericht

  • US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • US District Court for the District of Columbia
  • US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
  • US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit