Yar R. Chaikovsky

Chaikovsky oversees Paul Hastings' 100-plus IP practice as global co-chair of the group.

His clients include Snap Inc., Trend Micro Inc., Applied Materials Inc., Fitbit Inc., HTC Corp., TikTok Inc., Xtera Inc. and Canon Inc.

In 2020, he scored two wins at the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

In one, he defended Snap in high-stakes litigation brought by BlackBerry Ltd. on six patents related to mobile messaging technology.

He won summary judgment invalidating the six patents asserted against Snap; BlackBerry stipulated to a dismissal with prejudice of two before it appealed. BlackBerry Ltd. v. Snap Inc., 18-CV02693 (C.D. Cal., filed April 3, 2018).

For BlackBerry's appeal, argued in December 2020, the Federal Circuit panel required telephone appearances due to the pandemic.

"There are three smart judges on the line, and you can't see their faces," Chaikovsky said, expressing frustration at the limits that put on his courtroom style. "There's no human interaction, which makes it a lot harder and less satisfying."

Even so, he prevailed as the judges issued their affirmance two days after the argument.

"It's an interesting dynamic," he said of working by phone. "I did some prep by phone to get ready, to practice in the audio medium. You speak more slowly, and you don't want to step on any judge who is speaking.

"Yes, we won in a dispositive opinion," Chaikovsky added. "It was a challenge, but the right result. And the client hired us for another case."

In July 2020, Chaikovsky - representing Trend Micro - again defended a win he had won at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a six-patent case and got a summary affirmance at the Federal Circuit. SecurityProfiling LLC v. Trend Micro Inc., 2019-1881 (Fed. Cir., filed July 10, 2020).

That victory followed his and Paul Hastings' success for Trend Micro in a nine-year battle with Intellectual Ventures, a case that ended with a complete defense verdict and a partial fee award.

Chaikovsky said the pandemic has given rise to unprecedented procedural questions.

In litigation for Canon, which asserted five patents related to steaming, remote controlling and connectivity capabilities in Smart TVs against a Chinese conglomerate, questions arose over whether Canon's attorneys and experts could view the source code at issue remotely.

Chaikovsky pushed hard for the accommodation, citing the health risks of following the standard procedure of traveling to opposing counsel's office to view the code on a stand-alone computer under tight security. Canon Inc. v. TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd., 18-CV00546 (E.D. Tx., filed Dec. 27, 2018).

"Time was fleeting and we wanted to move forward," Chaikovsky said.

The case has since settled on confidential terms. But not long after the issue arose, one Eastern District of Texas court--despite mask requirements and other precautions--suffered a COVID-19 outbreak among lawyers, witnesses and staff, forcing court closures.

"They want to move justice forward, and good for them," Chaikovsky said of court officials. "But it can be tricky."

After the case settled, the court allowed partial remote viewing of source code in other cases due to COVID-19 concerns.

-- John Roemer