Erwin Cena focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and counseling inventors and businesses on options for protecting and commercializing their intellectual property. He also has experience in the areas of commercial litigation, products liability, personal injury and construction law.
Mr. Cena is actively involved in pro bono work. He served on the firm’s Pro Bono Committee where he identified opportunities to serve the local communities in need of legal counsel.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Cena worked as an associate at another San Diego law office where he represented plaintiffs and defendants in federal and state courts. While attending law school, he served as the senior articles editor for the UC Davis Journal of International Law and Policy. Mr. Cena also served a law clerk for the United States Attorney’s Offices in Sacramento, California, and in San Jose, California.
Before launching his legal career, Mr. Cena was employed by Hewlett-Packard where he was involved in the research and development of manufacturing processes for large-format inkjet printer cartridges. He also served in the United States Navy.
As counsel to the inventor and patent owner, obtained a verdict of willful infringement and an award of $20.3 for past damages after a seven day jury trial in the Eastern District of Texas. The Court increased the award to $23.6 million after ruling on post-trial motions. The two related inter partes review hearings resulted in an exceedingly rare final determination upholding the patentability of all challenged claims.
Counsel to consumer electronics company in intellectual property dispute in Northern District of California involving allegations of trademark and copyright infringement and counterclaims of patent infringement. Case settled before trial.
Defended Norwegian-based company in patent infringement dispute (Delaware District Court) pertaining to electromagnetic detection of hydrocarbon deposits in ocean floor. Identified invalidating prior art after which the case settled before expert discovery phase.
Defended consumer electronics and telecommunications company in patent infringement dispute (Southern District of California) pertaining to on-demand bandwidth requests by client devices and selective allocation of such bandwidth by mobile devices depending on Quality of Service needs. Case was dismissed early in litigation before significant fact discovery.
Counsel to major aerospace company in breach of contract and declaratory relief action against supplier in Los Angeles Superior Court. The case resulted in a favorable settlement to the client after fact discovery and successful efforts to bifurcate issues for trial.
Counsel to defendant cloud payment/credit card processing company in breach of contract and fraud case in San Diego Superior Court. The case resulted in favorable settlement to client before significant discovery costs incurred.
Insights View All
In The News
University of California, Davis School of Law, J.D. (2010)
University of Notre Dame, B.S., Electrical Engineering (2001)
University of Notre Dame, B.A., History (2001)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan
Federal Bar Association of San Diego, Member
Federal Bar Association, Committee on Mock Arguments, Member
San Diego County Bar Association, Member
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.