Mr. Jansen is a trial lawyer with several months of total in-court trial experience over his 24 year career. Mr. Jansen's practice includes a wide range of intellectual property, antitrust, unfair business practice, business tort, and other business dispute litigation.
Mr. Jansen has an undergraduate degree in chemistry from the University of California and also worked as a research chemist at Stauffer Chemical Company prior to attending law school. He has litigated a number of pharmaceutical and chemistry patent and trade secret cases, including a trial in the International Trade Commission regarding accused infringement of rubber chemical patents. Mr. Jansen has lectured and written on the antitrust law implications of settlements of Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) patent litigation, including lectures to the Association of Corporate Patent Counsel and Practicing Law Institute (PLI) programs. Mr. Jansen also has substantial appellate court experience. Most recently, he successfully defended Amazon.com and Visa International in two Ninth Circuit Internet copyright decisions, and obtained reversal of a patent ownership dispute against Intel Corp.
In addition, Mr. Jansen provides counseling, primarily in the antitrust and unfair business practices law areas, in a wide range of contexts including but not limited to mergers, intellectual property licensing, product distribution, vertical price restraints, trade secret protection, and development of antitrust compliance and amnesty programs. He also has represented clients in connection with grand jury and other government investigations.
Intellectual Property Representative Cases
Flexsys International v. Kumho Korea Petrochemical Corp., International Trade Commission (2005-2006). Successful defense of Korean rubber chemical and tire company accused of infringing rubber chemical patents, following a ten-day trial in ITC.
Various Watson Pharmaceuticals ANDA Patent Infringement cases, including:
Bayer Schering Pharma AG, et al. v. Sandoz, Inc., et al., Southern District of New York. Representing Watson in pending ANDA litigation over generic version of YASMIN.
Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., District of Nevada. Representing Watson in pending ANDA litigation of generic version of SEASONIQUE.
Bayer Schering Pharma AG et al. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., District of Nevada. Representing Watson in pending ANDA litigation over generic version of YAZ.
Shum v. Intel Corp. (2008). Six week federal court jury trial on patent inventorship dispute and related state law claims. Followed a successful appeal of district court's denial of inventor's right to a jury trial on patent inventorship issues. Shum v. Intel Corp. 499 F.3d 1272 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Polysilane chemistry trade secret case (2007-2008). Dispute regarding conception and reduction to practice of (and duty to assign) invention for synthesis of unique silicon polymers.
Perfect 10 v. Amazon.com, Inc., United States District Court, Los Angeles (2005-2007). United States District Court, Los Angeles (2005-2007). Successful defense of Internet copyright infringement claim against Amazon.com's Internet image search functionality. Reported decision: Perfect 10 v. Amazon.com, Inc., 487 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2007).
Bechtel Corp. v. The Shaw Group, United States District Court, Baltimore (2006). Successfully prosecuted trade secret case for Bechtel.
International Rectifier Corporation v. IXYS Corporation, United State District Court, Los Angeles (2003). Tried patent damages case to jury. Patent infringement action involving power transistor patents.
Perfect10, Inc. v. Visa Int'l Serv. Ass'n, et al., 497 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 2007), cert. den., ___ U.S, ___ (2008). Successfully defended Visa in federal copyright suit alleging vicarious and contributory trademark and copyright liability for providing financial services to operators of websites that infringed plaintiff's copyrighted images. Dismissal of action in Visa's favor affirmed by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Sebastian International, Inc. v. Longs Drug Stores Corporation, United States District Court, Los Angeles. Successful defense against preliminary injunction motion. Asserted antitrust and unfair business practice theories in successful defense of a manufacturer's attempt to enforce its product distribution restrictions through trademark infringement actions against unauthorized retailer.
Harris Corporation v. Mosel Vitelic, United States District Court, Virginia. Defense of integrated circuit maker accused of infringing six circuit and process patents. Case settled favorably with entry into license agreement.
Texas Instruments v. Hyundai Electronics, United States District Court, Texas. Defense of integrated circuit maker accused of patent infringement.
Berclain America Latina S.A. de C.V. v. Baan, N.V., et al, San Mateo Superior Court. Lead plaintiffs' counsel for Latin American software distributors in usurpation of business/unfair competition action against business software manufacturer Baan N.V. and related defendants. Favorably settled.
Network Services Corporation v. Buckner, Inc., AAA Arbitration (1998). Lead plaintiff's counsel in two week American Arbitration Association hearing concerning breach of best efforts clause in satellite communication technology license. Obtained award and judgment terminating license, returning technology, and awarding damages.
GRiD Systems Corp. v. Texas Instruments, Inc., Prosecuted federal antitrust and patent invalidity declaratory relief action on behalf of Tandy Corporation and its subsidiary, GRiD Systems Corp., against Texas Instruments. Key issues included the validity of Texas Instruments' microprocessor patents and the legality of its package patent licensing practices under the federal antitrust laws.
Lumatech v. Tek-Tron Industries, United States District Court, San Francisco. Successfully asserted patent invalidity and antitrust theories to renegotiate patent license terms.
Antitrust Representative Cases
Chinese Hospital v. Brown & Toland Medical Group, San Francisco Superior Court (2006). Plaintiff's counsel in action against major physicians network alleging market abuse.
Lingo, et al v. Microsoft Corp., San Francisco Superior Court (and follow-on federal class action) (2002-2005). Prosecution of antitrust and unfair competition claims against Microsoft on behalf of all California consumers of Microsoft products.
Forces Action v. State of Utah, et al, United States District Court, San Francisco. Lead counsel for State of Utah in successful defense of class action challenging multistate tobacco litigation settlement.
St. Luke's Hospital v. California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco Superior Court. Plaintiff's co-counsel in antitrust action challenging exclusive dealing contracts between large hospital system and the largest physicians group in San Francisco, California. Settled on favorable terms.
Central Garden and Pet Company v. Monsanto Corp. and The Scotts Company, San Francisco Federal Court. Represented distribution company in group boycott, price fixing and monopolization claims against agricultural chemical products companies.
Gonzales v. Kaiser Sand & Gravel Co. and Syar Industries, United States District Court, San Francisco. Lead counsel for Syar Industries in defense of wrongful termination action and two related antitrust class actions alleging price fixing and bid rigging in sand, gravel and asphaltic concrete markets.
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Wismer et al., United States District Court, San Francisco. Defense of bid rigging action brought by PG&E against numerous electrical contractors regarding construction of Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
Publications and Speaking Engagements
ANDA Litigation: Big Pharma v. Generics, The Annual IP Counsel Forum, March 26, 2008, Speaker
Reverse Payment Litigation Settlements: Antitrust Issues Affecting IP Licensing and Settlements of Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation, San Diego Intellectual Property Law Association, January 15, 2004, Speaker
Search Engine and Other Secondary Liability for Infringement on the Internet Perfect 10 v. Amazon.com, A9.com, and Google, AIPLA 2008 Spring Meeting, Houston, Texas, May 14, 2008, Speaker and Paper
"Settlement of IP Litigation as an Antitrust Violation," Practicing Law Institute Seminar, January 27, 2003, Speaker
To Settle or Not: Is Settling IP Litigation an Antitrust Violation?, Association of Corporate Patent Counsel, February 3, 2004, Speaker
Antitrust Implications of Patent Litigation Settlements, paper presented to Practicing Law Institute, June 3, 2003 and Association of Corporate Patent Counsel, February 3, 2004