Photograph of Brian Paul Gearing, Ph.D.

Brian Paul Gearing, Ph.D.

Partner


Brian Paul Gearing is a partner in the New York office of Crowell & Moring and a member of the Intellectual Property Group, focusing on patent litigation. He has experience in all stages of litigation, from pre-suit investigations through appeal in numerous jurisdictions, and before the ITC. Dr. Gearing has also advised clients on portfolio management and adversarial patent licensing negotiations and has prepared invalidity and non-infringement opinions. He has unique experience working in Tokyo, Japan, where he spent three years representing Asia Pacific-based clients in U.S. litigations and arbitrations.

Dr. Gearing has been lead trial counsel on numerous high-profile litigations that have resulted in favorable judgments and settlements for his clients, including winning the country’s first-ever trial to be held on the issue of IPR estoppel.

Dr. Gearing has substantial experience with a wide variety of technologies, including materials science, mechanics and dynamics of materials, cancer therapy, semiconductor and hard disk design and manufacturing, microprocessor technology, wireless communications, and networking equipment and architecture. He also counsels clients on the implementation of new technologies such as blockchain and distributed ledgers, and the development of innovative products such as virtual currencies and blockchain-based assets. Dr. Gearing is an author of fifteen scientific publications and a named inventor on two U.S. patents pertaining to implantable medical devices and friction and wear of novel nano-coatings (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,251,893 and 8,241,698).

Before law school, Dr. Gearing earned a Doctorate of Philosophy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where his research focused on the mechanics and dynamics of materials with an emphasis on fracture of polymers, as well as mechanical testing at the micro- and nano-scales. During law school at U.C. Berkeley School of Law, Dr. Gearing was on the Executive Board of the Berkeley Technology Law Journal and a Fellow of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology.

Representative Matters

  • Lead counsel for Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC in connection with patent litigation against Vibrant Licensing LLC regarding cellular products and touch screens before the District of Delaware.
  • Lead counsel for BMW of North America, LLC in connection with patent litigation against Display Technologies, LLC pertaining to Bluetooth products before the Western District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for Motorola Mobility LLC in connection with patent litigation against Callstat Solutions LLC regarding cellular products and related FRAND issues before the Western District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for Logitech Inc. in connection with patent litigation against 2BCom, LLC concerning networking products and related FRAND issues before the Northern District of California.
  • Lead counsel for Logitech Inc. in connection with patent litigation against Terrestrial Comms LLC concerning networking products before the Central District of California.
  • Lead counsel for NEC Corporation in connection with patent litigation against Terrestrial Comms LLC concerning networking products before the Western District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for NEC Corporation and NEC Corporation of America in connection with parallel patent litigation against Terrestrial Comms LLC concerning networking products before the Northern District of Texas after successful transfer out of the Western District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for Meditab Software, Inc. in connection with patent litigation against DatRec, LLC regarding Meditab’s intelligent medical software technology before the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for MRSI Systems, LLC in parallel patent litigations against Palomar Technologies, Inc. concerning high-precision automation equipment before the District of Massachusetts, Southern District of California, and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  In connection with District of Massachusetts litigation before Chief Judge Saylor, won the country’s first-ever trial to be held on the issue of IPR estoppel on May 4, 2020 and then obtained a full win on invalidity under 35 U.S.C. Sec. 101.  These wins were covered by significant press in major media outlets, including Law360, IPWatchdog, Mealey’s IP/Tech, Global Legal Chronicle, Massachusetts Lawyer’s Weekly, and New Hampshire Business Review.
  • Lead counsel for ViaClean Technologies, LLC in connection with parallel trade secret and patent litigations against Novalent, Ltd. regarding antimicrobial surface-coating technology before the North Carolina State Complex Business Court and Middle District of North Carolina, including also with respect to an appeal to the State Supreme Court of North Carolina regarding issues of federal jurisdiction.
  • Lead counsel for ViaClean Technologies, LLC in connection with patent litigation against Allied BioScience, Inc. regarding antimicrobial surface-coating technology before the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Lead counsel for ViaClean Technologies, LLC in connection with trademark litigation against Global BioProtect, LLC regarding antimicrobial surface-coating products before the Middle District of North Carolina.

Prior Representative Matters

  • Represented Cisco Systems, Inc., including as trial counsel, before the ITC in two parallel investigations (Nos. 944 & 945) against Arista Networks, Inc. These cases have been the subject of hundreds of articles and continue to be closely watched by the entire networking industry.
  • Represented Cisco Systems, Inc., including as trial counsel, before the ITC in an investigation involving Conversant Intellectual Property Management, Inc. f/k/a MOSAID Technologies, Inc. and the assertion of six U.S. patents in the context of Power-over-Ethernet technology. The litigation settled on the eve of the ITC hearing. Also represented Cisco against Conversant in a related proceeding in the District of Delaware. Cisco’s assertion of racketeering (RICO) claims against Conversant in connection with the district court litigation attracted national attention, including in the Wall Street Journal.
  • Represented, including as trial counsel, Cisco and other suppliers of Internet wireless routing products in a complex multi-district litigation concerning patents alleged to pertain to 802.11-standardized wireless technology. After a seven-day bench trial, determined that the plaintiff’s damages claim was limited to a RAND rate of less than 10 cents for each accused Wi-Fi product and also found that plaintiff’s demands for damages of more than a billion dollars “lacked a credible methodology” and that the plaintiff’s case suffered from a failure of proof. The case was hailed as highly favorable to technology companies and consumers and received worldwide media attention, including in the IPLaw 360 articles “FRAND Rulings To Rein In Standard-Essential Patent Demands” and “Judge Sets Low Royalty Rate For Essential Wi-Fi Patents.”
  • Represented Cisco in an ITC investigation against ChriMar Systems, Inc. involving Power-over-Ethernet technology. Related proceedings are currently pending in the Northern District of California and Eastern District of Michigan.
  • Trial counsel for Intel Corp. against MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent litigation concerning microprocessor and memory controller architectures. The case settled shortly before trial.
  • Trial counsel for Israel-based Yeda Research & Development Co. Ltd. against ImClone Systems Inc. and Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. in a multi-billion dollar inventorship dispute in the Southern District of New York over a patent related to the Erbitux® (Cetuximab) cancer treatment drug. After a bench trial, received a total win with the court ordering a complete replacement of the named inventors on the patent-at-issue. The trial received worldwide attention, including press in the United States and Israel. See Practical Lessons from a “Made for TV” Patent Litigation: The Trial of Yeda Research and Development Co. Ltd. v. ImClone Systems Inc. and Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. The Federal Lawyer, 55(2), 51-55 (2008) (Groombridge, N. and Gearing, B.). The litigation ultimately settled on confidential terms minutes before oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
  • Trial counsel for Shanghai-based Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment, Inc. against Applied Materials, Inc. in the Northern District of California in a trade secret misappropriation action involving semiconductor processing tools for etch and CVD. The case settled shortly before trial on confidential terms.
  • Represented Tokyo-based Astellas Pharma Inc. in connection with a securities litigation before the Delaware Court of Chancery.
  • Represented Tokyo-based NTT DoCoMo and Softbank Corp. in a patent litigation involving wireless communications and SMS text messaging in the District of Maryland.
  • Represented Tokyo-based Elpida Memory in an international arbitration and mediation involving integrated circuit testing equipment.
  • Represented Tokyo-based Sumitomo Corp. in an international dispute regarding an alleged breach of contract regarding mining operations.
  • Represented Samsung in an ITC investigation involving wireless communications and encryption.
  • Represented Liechtenstein-based Unaxis in a patent litigation involving hard disk manufacturing tools in the Central District of California.
  • Represented Unaxis in a patent litigation involving DLP television technology in the Northern District of California.
  • Dr. Gearing has also represented clients on a pro bono basis in connection with:
    • An appellate hearing before the U.S. Social Security Administration.
    • An amicus curiae brief filed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (see In re Pod-Ners, LLC (No. 2008-1492)).
    • A Japanese immigration application and appeal for a citizen of the Philippines claiming political asylum.
    • Counseling of potential sex trafficking victims in connection with the Queens Sanctuary for Families’ Anti-Trafficking Project.

Education

  • University of Maryland, College Park, B.S. mechanical engineering (1996) cum laude, Tau Beta Pi
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology, M.S. mechanical engineering (1999)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ph.D. mechanical engineering (2002)
  • University of California, Berkeley School of Law, J.D. with Certificate in Law & Technology (2005)

Affiliations

Admitted to practice: New York, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, U.S. International Trade Commission

Professionals Activities and Memberships

  • New York Intellectual Property Law Association
  • New York State Bar Association
  • American Bar Association
  • International Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association

View More

"Recent Developments in U.S. Patent Law and The Impact On Japanese Corporations," FRONTEO Webinar (May 11, 2022). Presenters: Brian Paul Gearing and Michael H. Jacobs.
Speech/Presentation
"Recent Developments in U.S. Patent Law and The Impact On Japanese Corporations," FRONTEO Webinar (November 4, 2021). Presenters: Brian Paul Gearing and Michael H. Jacobs.
Speech/Presentation
FRONTEO Holds Online Seminar Co-sponsored by US Law Firm Crowell & Moring LLP Latest Trends in US Patent Law and Impact on Japanese Companies MarketScreener (November 2, 2021)
Press Coverage
"Reexamining Three Preconceived Notions Of SEPs As The 5G Patent Wars Ignite," IPWatchdog (October 25, 2021). Authors: Joshua Pond, Brian Paul Gearing, Zach Ruby, Christopher Gerardot, and Carissa Wilson.
Publication
ViaClean Technologies & PureShield File Suit Against Novalent, Ltd., & Inhold, LLC For Breach Of Contract, Fraud, Unfair Competition And Deceptive Trade Practices iCrowdNewswire (November 20, 2020)
Press Coverage
ViaClean Technologies & PureShield File Suit Against Novalent, Ltd., & Inhold, LLC For Breach Of Contract, Fraud, Unfair Competition And Deceptive Trade Practices PR Newswire (November 17, 2020)
Press Coverage
PureShield And ViaClean Technologies File Suit Against Allied BioScience For Patent Infringement, False Advertising, Unfair Competition & Tortious Interference PR Newswire (September 30, 2020)
Press Coverage
PureShield Says Allied Bio Coronavirus Disinfectant Infringes Law360 (September 29, 2020)
Press Coverage
"U.K. Supreme Court Affirms Global FRAND Rate-Setting Procedure in U.K. National Courts," Antitrust Law Alert (August 28, 2020). Contact: Brian Paul Gearing, Ph.D.
Client Alert / Newsletter
"Diligent and Skilled: The Changing Standard for IPR Estoppel," IP Litigator (June 22, 2020). Authors: Zach Ruby, Brian Paul Gearing, and Michael H. Jacobs.
Publication

For all Highlights, News & Knowledge, please click here to view desktop bio.

Crowell & Moring LLP is an international law firm with offices in the United States, Europe, MENA, and Asia that represents clients in litigation and arbitration, regulatory and policy, and transactional and corporate matters. The firm is internationally recognized for its representation of Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes litigation and government-facing matters, as well as its ongoing commitment to pro bono service and diversity, equity, and inclusion.

View Desktop Site | Mobile Sitemap |

Contact | Subscribe | Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Alumni

© Crowell & Moring LLP 2022
Attorney advertising - prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.