David M. Stein

Stein had a very good year. He tried two patent cases and a trademark case to verdict and was part of a team that settled a trademark case the day before jury selection.

“It was just a great year for me because I love trials, and having three, almost four trials in a year — that’s unheard of,” he said.

In his quarter-century of litigating intellectual property and complex civil cases, he has handled over 100 patent matters. Overall, he has taken 18 cases to verdict in courts across the country, he said.

In 2021, however, “I got to spend the majority of my year in trial prep, which is very grueling and stressful, but also the most fun, fascinating part of what we do.”

Stein even enjoys jumping into a case late when trial is imminent. That’s what he did in a trademark and trade name infringement case between two former partners who had become competitors in pension-administration businesses. “We appeared in late July and went to trial in September.”

With previous counsel, his client had lost a summary judgment motion on liability, so he and his team were brought in to try damages only. After a three-day court trial, the judge awarded the plaintiff only about $82,000 rather than the millions she’d sought, Stein said. The case is now on appeal. Jackson v. Gaspar, 2:19-cv-10450 (C.D. Cal., filed Dec. 10, 2019).

Stein’s team for the case was two young associates who each examined two witnesses. He also is overseeing their work on two pro bono prisoner civil rights cases he brought to the firm.

His two patent trials each dealt with unusual technology. In one, he defended a company accused by a competitor of infringing patents involving grain-storage devices, which he compared to giant tarps. “Most people probably wouldn’t know how much really amazing tech goes into agriculture to make farming more efficient and cost-effective and environmentally sound,” he said. The case settled after the jury’s verdict. J&M Industries Inc. v. Raven Industries Inc., 2:16-cv-02723 (D. Kan., filed Oct. 21, 2016).

The second patent trial deals with technology to turn trash into methane for use as fuel. Stein is defending Waste Management Inc. in the case, which also includes contract claims. The technology involved “could have tremendous environmental impact … on real people and real life,” Stein said. “It’s just an honor to … work with people who do this.”

After a bench trial in December, the judge ruled for Stein’s client on some claims, while a decision on the others is pending. Doda v. Waste Management Inc., 1:17-cv-00604 (D. Del., filed May 25, 2017).

The case that almost but didn’t go to trial concerned trademark and other disputes involving methods of creating software. Stein was brought into the case late in part because it was to be tried in Houston, where he began his legal career and still has many friends in the bar. In fact, one of the opposing counsel was a former judge who had officiated at Stein’s wedding.

– Don DeBenedictis