David R. Pekarek Krohn

Senior Counsel

Madison

Notice

Before proceeding, please note: If you are not a current client of Perkins Coie, please do not include any information in this e-mail that you or someone else considers to be of a confidential or secret nature. Perkins Coie has no duty to keep confidential any of the information you provide. Neither the transmission nor receipt of your information is considered a request for legal advice, securing or retaining a lawyer. An attorney-client relationship with Perkins Coie or any lawyer at Perkins Coie is not established until and unless Perkins Coie agrees to such a relationship as memorialized in a separate writing.

vCard

Dave represents clients in patent infringement suits in highly active U.S. patent courts, including Texas and California district courts and the International Trade Commission.

Patent and appellate litigator David Pekarek Krohn uses his technical experience in electrical engineering and computer science to litigate patents related to smartphones, cloud computing, streaming media, email technology, video game systems, light-emitting diodes, and logic circuits. Dave has also represented pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman litigation.

In addition to district court patent litigation, Dave counsels clients in inter partes reviews before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He has experience handling Federal Circuit appeals from district court patent litigation, as well as appearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Prior to his legal career, Dave worked as an engineer and manager in the software industry during the technology boom of the 1990s and early 2000s, where he developed award-winning educational and entertainment multimedia applications. His work included supervising the engineering of a computer version of a well-known television game show and launching the first networked version of a popular trivia game franchise. He offers an informed perspective when analyzing software prior art from that era, which is an issue that often arises for his clients.

Dave's pro bono work includes two successful cases to free men wrongfully convicted of murder. In 2014, Dave argued the case of Teshome Campbell before the Seventh Circuit. He won the appeal and a later evidentiary hearing, and Mr. Campbell was released from prison after 18 years of incarceration. Dave also worked on the case of Eric Blackmon at the federal appellate and district court levels. Mr. Blackmon's conviction was overturned in February 2018, after 16 years of incarceration.

Areas of focus

Industries

Interactive Entertainment

Semiconductor

Immersive Technology

Digital Media & Entertainment, Gaming & Sports

Music, Film & Television

Services

Litigation

Patent Litigation

Post-Grant Proceedings

Education & Credentials

Education

Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, J.D., cum laude, Order of the Coif, Senior Articles Editor, Northwestern University Law Review, 2010
University of Michigan, B.S., Computer Science, 1992

Bar and Court Admissions

Wisconsin
Illinois
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas

Related Employment

Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL, Associate, 2010-2011; Summer Associate, 2009
Emmi Solutions, LLC, Chicago, IL, Director of Production, 2003-2007
Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, IL, Senior Software Engineer, 2001-2003
Jellyvision, Inc., Chicago, IL, Creative Designer/Director; Software Development Manager; Software Engineer; 1998-2001

Clerkships

Hon. William Bryson, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Professional Recognition

Recognized by Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch for Appellate Practice; Litigation – Patent, 2024-2025

Professional Experience

Patent Litigation

AstraZeneca AB et al. v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
Represented Mylan in Hatch-Waxman litigation over patent rights to esomeprazole (Nexium®). Defeated motion for a preliminary injunction in the district court and on appeal, allowing Mylan to market a generic esomeprazole product.

Hospira, Inc. et al. v. Sylvia Matthews Burwell, et al.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Represented intervenor-defendant Mylan Institutional LLC in a suit brought by Hospira in the District of Maryland against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to rescind approval of a generic sedative. Successfully obtained summary judgment, allowing Mylan to market its product. After Hospira appealed to Fourth Circuit, negotiated a successful settlement agreement.

Parallel Iron, LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., Netflix Inc. and LinkedIn Corporation

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Representing Amazon.com, Netflix and LinkedIn in a patent suit concerning distributed file system technology.

Split Pivot Inc. v. Trek Bicycle Corporation

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
Defended Wisconsin bicycle manufacturer in a patent infringement suit in which certain Trek mountain bikes were accused of infringing patents relating to vehicle suspension systems. Successfully obtained summary judgment ruling of non-infringement, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

VISICU Inc. v. iMDsoft Ltd., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Represented patent-holder VISICU against accused infringers of VISICU’s patents relating to systems and methods for providing expert care to hospitalized patients from remote locations.

The Medicines Company v. Mylan Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Trial and appellate counsel for Mylan in Hatch-Waxman litigation over patent rights to bivalirudin (Angiomax®). After the district court found that Mylan infringed only one of two patents, the Federal Circuit ruled that both patents were invalid.

Apotex, Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Representing intervenor Mylan in a dispute regarding Mylan’s 180-day exclusivity rights to market generic Benicar®. Case is ongoing.

Insights

More insights

Podcast

November 22, 2021