The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of the world's premier and most diversified sports, entertainment, and media company, and co-defendant for infringement of a South Carolina tennis teaching professional’s U.S. patent relating to a hybrid tennis court. The patent covers a tennis court having one type of surface (such as grass) on one side of the net and a different surface (such as clay) on the opposite side. The plaintiff sued the client because it promoted a match between the top two tennis players in the world on a half grass-half clay tennis court called Battle of the Surfaces. The problem with the plaintiff's case was the match took place in Spain, which required the tennis court to be in Spain as well. Since she possessed only a U.S. patent, the plaintiff attempted to create new law by alleging that televising the match in the U.S. and the use of images of the court on web sites promoting the match in the U.S. should constitute infringing "use" of the tennis court. Judge Joseph Anderson of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, Rock Hill Division, disagreed and granted motions in favor of our client to dismiss the complaint. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed Judge Anderson's decision.

Experience Center

Match our Experience to Your Needs

Experience Highlights

Chapter 11 cases representing examiner for a subprime mortgage lender
Represented William F. Perkins, the examiner appointed in the Chapter 11 cases of HomeGold Financial Inc., HomeGold Inc. and Carolina Investors Inc., more
Venture capital transaction for two venture capital firms
Represented two venture capital firms in a venture capital and investment fund transaction. more
Sale of interest in a physician owned cath lab for Atlanta Cardiology Group P.C.
Represented Atlanta Cardiology Group P.C. in the sale of majority interest in a physician owned cath lab to more
H-D Michigan Inc. v. Top Quality Service Inc.
Represented Harley-Davidson Motor Company in winning a reversal in the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. The Court held more