Baker Marquart represents plaintiffs and defendants in patent infringement actions across the country. The firm’s patent litigators have experience in a wide range of technical industries. May Chan, a member of Baker Marquart’s patent team, has technical degrees and is the named inventor on several cellular telephone technology patents. Ryan Baker, the firm’s managing partner, has first-chaired patent cases involving several different technologies, ranging from website software code to photographic light design to hologram projection technology.

Clients come to Baker Marquart when they cannot afford to lose and elect not to pay exorbitant big-firm rates. Recognizing patent litigation as critically important but also particularly costly, Baker Marquart staffs patent cases efficiently. The firm streamlines issues at the outset of an engagement to minimize expense. Baker Marquart also represents clients before the Patent and Trademark Office in Inter Partes Review and other proceedings. The firm provides cost-effective counsel in any patent litigation setting. Based on its efficiency and expertise in patent litigation, Baker Marquart has frequently been asked to substitute into active matters to address issues created by other counsel. In one recent engagement, the firm, shortly after retention, successfully defended against summary judgment motions and obtained court orders correcting mistakes made earlier in the case.

No Baker Marquart client has had a patent invalidated; nor has any firm client received an adverse infringement ruling. Baker Marquart can help you or your business protect intellectual property.

Representative engagements:

  • eDirect Publishing, Inc. v. LiveCareer, Ltd., et al., NO 3:12-CV-01123-JLS-JMA, 2014 WL 11974992 (S.D. Cal., May 8, 2012)
  • Hologram USA, Inc., et al. v. Pulse Evolution Corporation, et al., No 2:14-CV-0772-GMN-NJK, 2016 WL 199417 (D. Nev., Jan. 15, 2016)
  • Hologram USA, Inc., et al. v. Arena3D Industrial Illusion LLC, et al., No. CV 14-03072, United States District Court, Central District of California)
  • Hologram USA, Inc., et al. v. Twentieth Century Fox Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-09340, United States District Court, Central District of California
  • Hologram USA, Inc., et al. v. Ventana 3D LLC, et al., No. CV 14-09489, United States District Court, Central District of California
  • Pulse Entertainment Corporation v. David, et al., Case No. CV14-04732, United States District Court, District of Nevada
  • Top Lighting Corporation, v. Linco, Inc., Case No. 5:14-cv-01589, United States District Court, Central District of California