Kalpana Srinivasan

One of the hottest corners in the developing so-called Internet of Things is the wearable activity tracker market. Srinivasan is at the heart of it, representing consumer technology company Jawbone's UP brand as co-lead counsel in patent and trade secret litigation against rival Fitbit Inc. "Very active litigation right now," she said. "These devices with sophisticated electronic capabilities built into a small form factor with the capability to gather data and tell you about your own activities turn out to be appealing to consumers concerned with their habits and wellness."

The litigation spans multiple jurisdictions, with patent and unfair competition as well as trade secret claims headed to trial before the International Trade Commission in May. "We go to D.C. for the trial," Srinivasan said. "It'll be a week-long proceeding before an administrative law judge. The remedy we're seeking is a ban on the importation of Fitbit's products from overseas if the judge rules Fitbit is in violation of federal trade laws."

ITC proceedings move at rocket docket speed. "The schedule moves so quickly it requires constant evaluation and attention because it is so compressed, unlike in district court," she said.

As usual, the ITC patent case is accompanied by a parallel district court case. Jawbone has pending patent infringement claims against Fitbit in the Northern District, where economic damages are a possible outcome.

As for the product itself, Srinivasan is a devotee. "I do work out and wear Jawbone," she said. "It's a beautiful device, it integrates aesthetically, it suits my tech needs. Mine's blue, I got an upgrade. It will synch to your mobile device. I wear it all day and night?it has fantastic sleep functionality. It can wake you at an ideal time in your sleep cycle. It makes you think about your lifestyle."

Srinivasan was brought on just months before a 2015 $95 million patent infringement jury trial for client GNPE Corp., which claimed Apple. Inc. misused its wireless data communication technology dating from the pager era. A San Jose federal jury rejected the claim, but found two GNPE communication patents valid.

"We're on appeal to the Federal Circuit," Srinivasan said. "Our argument focuses on construction of the claim terms. The jury did the construction, but that is a legal question for the judge, not a matter of juror fact-finding. We're awaiting oral argument."

? John Roemer