George E. Badenoch

George has over 30 years of experience in litigation and adversarial matters concerning all aspects of intellectual property, including patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and copyrights. He has particular experience in major patent litigations (jury and non-jury) involving computers, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals, with an emphasis on computerized automatic machinery and equipment and automobile parts. He also counsels clients in patent and other IP licensing matters, and has been involved in the licensing aspects of large M&A transactions.

• Represented Toyota in a patent infringement case brought by Arigna Technology relating to oscillator chips for radar safety system sensors. Arigna Technology Limited v. Toyota et.al.
• Defended Toyota against a series of patent infringement cases charging that various automobile telematics and safety systems infringed on 24 patents of an Acacia subsidiary. Secured mandamus order from the Federal Circuit directing the Eastern District of Texas court to transfer the cases to the Eastern District of Michigan, invalidated several asserted patents in inter partes review before the PTAB, and secured dismissal of all remaining cases. American Vehicular Sciences v. Toyota, et al.
• Defended Toyota against a patent infringement case asserting three patents relating to airbag control systems and blindspot monitoring technology brought by an Acacia subsidiary called Signal IP. Signal IP, Inc. v. Toyota, et al.
• Defended Toyota in a series of patent infringement cases relating to hybrid cars brought by Paice LLC in the Eastern District of Texas and the US International Trade Commission (ITC), settling after a jury trial and multiple appeals.
• Defended Elpida and downstream distributors against parallel suits in Delaware, Washington State, and the ITC charging that Elpida’s memory chips infringed several Intellectual Ventures’ patents. Intellectual Ventures v. Elpida, et al.
• Defended Elpida in a patent infringement suit brought by Mosaid against client’s memory chips. Mosaid LLC v. Elpida, et al.
• Represented Elpida and its successor Micron, Inc. in defending against a patent infringement case filed by MIT and the University of Maryland. The patent was held invalid in parallel IPR proceedings. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, et al. v. Elpida, et al.
• Represented Olympus in a patent infringement case on photographic storage technology brought by Walker Digital LLC against Olympus and other camera companies. Case settled after favorable PTO action in parallel reexamination proceedings. Walker Digital LLC v. Olympus, et al.
• Acted as lead counsel for a large group of automobile importers and secured dismissal of a much publicized patent infringement case brought by the alleged inventor of intermittent windshield wipers, even though the same plaintiff had previously secured multi-million dollar verdicts against two of Detroit’s big three automobile manufacturers. Kearns v. Toyota, et al.
• Represented Takeda and its distributor, American Home Products, in a complex patent infringement case relating to acellular pertussis vaccines. Secured summary judgment of non-infringement and affirmance of the summary judgment on appeal. Evans Medical, et al. v. American Home Products and Takeda.
• Represented Olympus and secured successful settlement of cross patent infringement suits, brought by i) Given Imaging against Olympus and ii) Olympus against Given Imaging, relating to capsule endoscopes. Given Imaging v. Olympus.
• Represented Pico in a patent infringement action on pay TV security equipment. Case settled after client prevailed on key summary judgment motions. Pico v. Eagle Comptronics.
• Represented Air Liquide in a patent infringement case involving environmentally safer ozone paper bleaching processes. Air Liquide SA v. P.F. Glatfelter.
• In one of several important patent infringement cases on balloon-expandable heart stents, defended Boston Scientific in long and complex multi-stage litigation. In the initial trial, the jury found several Cordis patents invalid and/or not infringed, but found one claim infringed under doctrine of equivalents based on an erroneous jury instruction that was later vacated by the district court. The case settled after further trials and intervening appeals. Cordis v. Boston Scientific, et al.
• Represented Construction Technology in combination patent and trade secret case relating to computerized design of air conditioning duct work. Secured multi-million dollar jury verdict and enhanced damages and attorneys fees in client’s favor. Construction Technology, Inc. v. Lockformer.
• Defended Olympus and settled patent infringement case brought by Welch Allen on video endoscopes. Welch Allen Inc. v. Olympus.
• Defended Olympus and settled patent infringement action brought by Honeywell against Olympus and others on autofocus SRL cameras. Honeywell Inc. v. Olympus, et al.

• Selected as a Best Lawyer for Litigation – Patent in New York (2020, 2023-2024), The Best Lawyers in America
• Recognized as a Super Lawyer for Intellectual Property Litigation (2009-2024), The New York Times Magazine / New York Super Lawyers
• Recommended for Patents: Litigation (Full Coverage) (2015, 2016) and Patents: Licensing (2014, 2015), Legal 500 United States
• Recommended for Patent Litigation in New York in the IAM Patent 1000 (2013), Intellectual Asset Management
• Recognized (2013-2014), The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers

• Federal Circuit Bar Association
• The New York Intellectual Property Law Association
• The Association of the Bar of the City of New York
• The Licensing Executives Society