Calvin Wingfield is a partner in the firm's Litigation Department and a member of its Patent Litigation Practice. Mr. Wingfield has experience in a broad range of intellectual property matters, including patent and trademark litigation, patent enforcement, and intellectual property counseling. He also has experience in preparing and prosecuting patent applications. His patent experience covers a diverse range of technologies, including optical devices; electronics and electrical devices; computer hardware, including databases and data storage; computer software; networking architecture; telecommunications and wireless technology; and financial systems; air craft and pharmaceuticals.

Experience

Erfahrung

工作经历

Mr. Wingfield has handled all aspects of patent litigation, including claim construction proceedings, summary judgment hearings, trials and appeals. The following are some of Mr. Wingfield’s representative client representations:

  • Cephalon, Inc. Mr. Wingfield is a member of the team representing Cephalon in multiple patent infringement cases involving its innovative treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, TREANDA®.
  • CardinalCommerce Corporation. Mr. Wingfield represented CardinalCommerce in two patent infringement cases against SecureBuy, LLC and three covered business method patent (“CBM”) reviews involving CardinalCommerce’s innovative methods and systems for authenticating e-commerce transactions. The Patent Trial Board denied institution of SecureBuy’s CBM petitions.
  • In re Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-739. Mr. Wingfield represented third party Pass & Seymour, Inc. in an advisory proceeding before the U.S. International Trade Commission concerning its ground fault circuit interrupters. This case raised an issue of first impression as to whether the manufacturer could intervene in an enforcement action against its distributor.
  • Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. v. Bank of America Corp. et al., No. 12-cv-617 (E.D. Tex.). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team representing defendant Bank of America in a patent infringement case involving mobile banking technology.
  • Parallel Iron, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 12-cv-995 (D. Del.). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team representing defendant Bank of America in a patent infringement case involving data storage management systems used in distributed file systems.
  • Williamson v. Citrix et al., No. 11-cv-02409 (C.D. Cal.). Mr. Wingfield is a member of the trial and appellate team representing defendant IBM in a patent infringement case involving web conferencing software technology. The district court issued a Markman ruling favorable to IBM, which resulted in the patentee stipulating to non-infringement.
  • X-ray Optical Systems, Inc. v. Innov-X Systems, Inc., No. 11-cv-0156 (N.D.N.Y.). Mr. Wingfield is a member of the team representing defendant Innov-X Systems in a patent inventorship and breach of non-disclosure agreement case involving fuel analysis technology.
  • Augme Technologies, Inc. Mr. Wingfield represented Augme in multiple patent infringement cases brought by Augme involving software for delivery of targeted advertising over the Internet, and a case involving trademark infringement.
  • Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. Mr. Wingfield has represented Bell Helicopter in two patent infringement cases involving helicopter landing gear. The district courts in both cases issued Markman rulings favorable to Bell Helicopter. One of the cases settled shortly before the pre-trial conference. The other remains pending.
  • Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. v. International Securities Exchange, LLC, No. 07-cv-623 (N.D. Ill.). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the trial and appellate team that represented defendant and patent owner International Securities Exchange in both the district court and the court of appeals in a patent infringement case involving a system for automatically trading financial instruments. In the first appeal from this case, the appellate court vacated the district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement and affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Chicago Board Options Exchange’s inequitable conduct defense. In the second appeal from this case, the appellate court vacated the district court’s finding that a computer-implemented means-plus-function claim was invalid as indefinite.
  • Pi-Net Int’l, Inc. v. Bank of America, N.A., et al., No. 12-cv-280 (D. Del.). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team representing defendant Bank of America in a patent infringement case involving online banking systems.
  • Chalumeau Power Systems LLC v. Alcatel-Lucent et al., No. 11-cv-1175 (D. Del.). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team that defended various Alcatel-Lucent entities in a patent infringement case involving networking switches.
  • In the Matter of Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products Containing Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-830. Mr. Wingfield is a member of the team that represented respondent GE in a patent infringement case involving light bulb ballasts.
  • X-ray Optical Systems, Inc. v. Innov-X Systems, Inc., No. 11-cv-0156 (N.D.N.Y.). Mr. Wingfield represented defendant Innov-X Systems in a patent inventorship and breach of non-disclosure agreement case involving fuel analysis technology.
  • Picture Patents, LLC v. Aeropostale, Inc. et al., 788 F. Supp. 2d 127 (S.D.N.Y. 2011), aff’d Picture Patents, LLC v. Aeropostale, Inc. et al., No. 2011-1558 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 13, 2012). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team that represented defendant IBM in both the district court court of appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of IBM concerning the ownership of 12 patents obtained by a former employee after leaving IBM. The court of appeals summarily affirmed that determination, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari.
  • Pass & Seymour, Inc. v. General Protecht Group, Inc. (N.D.N.Y.). Mr. Wingfield is a member of the team representing plaintiff Pass & Seymour in a patent infringement case involving electrical devices – in particular, ground fault circuit interrupters.
  • Pass & Seymour, Inc. v. Hubbell Inc., 2011 WL 32433, 2009 WL 7296903 (N.D.N.Y.). Mr. Wingfield represented plaintiff Pass & Seymour in a patent infringement action involving electrical devices – in particular, ground fault circuit interrupters. The district court issued a Markman ruling favorable to the plaintiff on ten patents relating to ground fault circuit interrupters.
  • In the Matter of Certain Display Devices Including Digital Televisions And Monitors, Investigation No. 337-TA-713 (ITC 2010). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team that represented respondent TPV in a patent litigation concerning televisions and flat-screen monitors.
  • In the Matter of Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters And Products Containing The Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-615, 2009 WL 962585 (ITC 2009), aff’d in part General Proctecht Group, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 619 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2010) and Pass & Seymour, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 617 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the trial and appellate team that represented complainant Pass & Seymour in both the U.S. International Trade Commission and on appeal to the Federal Circuit. All six asserted patents were held valid, enforceable and infringed after the hearing before the Commission. The decision was affirmed-in-part resulting in the exclusion of 15 of 16 respondents from the market.
  • In the Matter of Certain Hard Disk Drives, Components Thereof, And Products Containing The Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-616 (ITC 2008). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team that represented respondent Hewlett-Packard against allegation of infringement of patents relating to disk drive manufacturing.
  • In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication Equipment, Articles Therein, And Products Containing The Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-577 (ITC 2006). Mr. Wingfield was a member of the team that represented respondent Ericsson in a patent infringement case involving cellular telephony technology.
Professional Activities

Mr. Wingfield is a member of the American Bar Association (co-chair of the Young Lawyers’ Sub-Committee for the Intellectual Property Litigation Committee of the Section of Litigation), the National Bar Association, the New York Intellectual Property Law Association and the Honorable William C. Conner Inn of Court.

Professional Experience

Prior to joining Goodwin, Mr. Wingfield was an associate at an IP boutique law firm, where he focused his practice on patent prosecution and litigation.

In The News

In den Nachrichten

在新闻中

Credentials

Anmeldeinformationen

专业资格

Education

J.D., 2006
Emory University School of Law
B.S., Computer Science, 2003
Morehouse College

(cum laude)

Admissions

Bar

New York

Courts

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Get In Touch
In Kontakt kommen
Get In Touch
联系我们
Our clients rely on us for world-class advisory services, counsel on complex transactional work and high-stakes litigation. Specializing in matters involving the financial, life sciences, private equity, real estate, and technology industries, we use a collaborative, cross-disciplinary approach to resolve our clients’ most challenging issues. To find out more, please contact us.
Unsere Kunden verlassen sich auf uns für erstklassige Beratungsdienste, beraten über komplexe Transaktionsarbeiten und High-Stakes-Prozesse. Spezialisiert auf Angelegenheiten der Finanz-, Life-Sciences-, Private-Equity-, Immobilien-und Technologie-Industrie, verwenden wir eine kooperative, interdisziplinäre Ansatz zur Lösung unserer Kunden am schwierigsten Fragen. Um mehr zu erfahren, kontaktieren Sie uns bitte.

客户信赖我们世界一流的咨询服务,希望获得针对复杂事务性工作与高风险诉讼的建议。我们通过协作式、跨领域的工作方法来解决客户最棘手的问题,涵盖金融、生命科学、私募股权、不动产和技术等多个行业。如需更多信息,请与我们联系。

Search Other Lawyers
Suche Andere Rechtsanwälte
搜寻其他律师