Bobbie Wilson

Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, No. 19-1686

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
For the last three years, Bobbie has been a member of a team representing multiple defendants, including Netflix, in a patent case against Uniloc. The issue in question involved the problem that consumers of software use digital products on multiple devices, where consumers have “a legitimate need to install and use the software on every computer.” On Hulu’s petition, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted inter partes review (IPR) and found multiple claims unpatentable over the prior art. The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of invalidity of all original claims and subsequently affirmed the denial of Uniloc’s motion for rehearing.

Convergent Media Solutions LLC v. Hulu LLC, Netflix Inc. and Roku LLC

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Represents Netflix, Hulu, and Roku in a trio of patent infringement cases brought by Convergent Media Solutions, LLC that are pending before District Judge David C. Godbey. The cases involve six patents which are being asserted against a number of "second screen" features that facilitate the use of smartphones and tablets in conjunction with other multimedia devices such as streaming boxes and game consoles.

TransVideo Electronics, LTD v. Hulu LLC and Netflix Inc.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Achieved a victory for Hulu and Netflix in the TransVideo case when Judge Leonard P. Stark was convinced to do early claim construction on a term. The court granted defendants construction. Plaintiff stipulated to noninfringement and the case was dismissed with prejudice a week later.

ARCzar LLC, et al. v. Nintendo of America, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represent Nintendo in a patent case relating to graphic user interface patents.

Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Netflix, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represents Netflix and Amazon in a patent case relating to JPEG technology.

Transvideo v. Nintendo Company, Ltd., et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Represent Nintendo in a patent case relating to an on-demand video distribution system involving its 3DS, DSi, and Wii video game consoles.

In Motion Imagery Technologies, LLC, v. Netflix Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Lead counsel for Netflix in a patent infringement case relating to digital video recording and playback technology.

LVL v. First Data Corporation, et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Lead trial counsel representing First Data in a patent infringement case involving patents in the field of data transaction assembly servers and data transaction processing systems.

Rambus v. Broadcom

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented Broadcom in a multi-patent infringement lawsuit involving DRAM memory controllers.

LendingTree v. QuinStreet Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
Represented QuinStreet Inc. in a patent infringement case relating to online home loan sales technology.

Nidec Corporation v. Victor Company of Japan, Ltd., et al.*

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented defendant JVC in a patent infringement case relating to hard disk drive technology. The action included counterclaim patents asserted by JVC and was settled weeks before trial on terms including a business arrangement between the parties and a patent license.

Technology Licensing Company, Inc. v. Bang & Olufsen America Inc.*

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented defendant in patent infringement case relating to DVD technology.

NTP Inc. v. Research in Motion, Ltd.*

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Defended RIM in the BlackBerry patent infringement case on appeal to the Federal Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court and on remand in the district court.

* Prior Experience

One Wisconsin Institute, Inc., et al v. Gerald C. Nichol, et al

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
Co-lead trial counsel in a high-profile lawsuit in Wisconsin brought on behalf of a diverse group of individuals and organizations regarding voting rights. The suit alleges that over a dozen election-law measures enacted in Wisconsin in recent years—including reductions to early voting, restrictions on voter registration, and a provision that permits election observers to stand within three feet of voters—unduly burden the right to vote and were intended to discriminate and have the effect of discriminating on the basis of race. This case also raised the novel claim that the challenged laws are the product of unconstitutional “partisan fencing”—in other words, that the laws deliberately burden certain voters because of how they want to vote.

Conley v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Phillip Morris Inc.*

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Led R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to its first defense victory in California involving an individual smoking case, Conley v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Phillip Morris, Inc. After an almost four-week jury trial, the court granted directed verdict for R.J. Reynolds. Prior to this victory, no tobacco company had ever escaped the wrath of a California jury that routinely awarded damages in the tens of millions against the companies.

Advanced Development Holdings Inc. v. Brea Canon Oil Company Inc.*

Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Lead trial counsel in a complicated oil and gas case that resulted in a directed verdict on behalf of the client after a three-week jury trial. In Advanced Development Holdings Inc. v. Brea Canon Oil Company Inc., Hon. Joanne O'Donnell granted BCI's motion for a directed verdict after the close of all evidence. This trial was the third trial in a span of 10 months where Bobbie served as lead counsel for BCI. The directed verdict was recently affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, Div. 4.

Issa and Rizkallah v. Roadway Package Systems, Inc. d/b/a/ RPS Inc., FedEx Corporation, d/b/a/FedEx Ground Inc., Stacy Shoun, et al.*

Superior Court of California, Alameda County
After the jury had already found liability and awarded compensatory damages totaling $1 million against a co-defendant, Bobbie came in as new trial counsel and convinced the jury to award only $56.00 total in punitive damages even after they had found liability for national origin discrimination. The same jury awarded $50 million in total damages against the company which was represented by another law firm.

Estate of Mattie Aikens, Deceased and William Aikens v. Charles Oliver, et al.*

Superior Court of California, Alameda County
As a new trial counsel, convinced a hostile jury to award a nominal amount of punitive damages even after they had already found liability for predatory lending and unfair business practices.

* Prior Experience

Vance v. Google

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Hired as lead trial counsel to defend Google in a putative class action alleging violations of Illinois’ Biometric Privacy Information Act (BIPA). The proposed class is comprised of individuals whose photographs were allegedly compiled, without plaintiffs’ consent, into a dataset by Flickr and IBM that could be used to train facial recognition software. Plaintiffs further allege that Google obtained a copy of the dataset and used their biometric information without consent to develop a facial recognition algorithm that could more accurately recognize women and people of color.

In re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Lead trial counsel in a consolidated class action complaint claiming Google violated the Wiretap Act, the Stored Communications Act (SCA), and California’s Constitution, Invasion of Privacy Act, and Unfair Competition Law (UCL) when Google Assistant—an AI-powered virtual assistant—allegedly recorded plaintiffs’ conversations without consent. In granting the motion to dismiss, the Court found nearly all twelve claims insufficiently pled, allowing only a subpart each of the SCA and UCL claims to proceed.

Brekhus v. Google

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Lead trial counsel in a putative class action alleging that the Google Assistant—the company’s artificial intelligence-powered virtual assistant—allegedly recorded sounds without consent. The proposed class is brought on behalf of individuals who had Google Home devices, on which the Assistant is installed, in their homes. Plaintiffs bring claims under California privacy and consumer protection laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act, and the federal Wiretap Act.

Bonoan v. Adobe

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
With alleged TCPA violations, Adobe retained Bobbie as lead trial counsel in a putative class action lawsuit. The plaintiff was seeking statutory damages in the tens of millions of dollars. Bobbie won dismissal of the suit (with leave to amend). The matter is ongoing.

Farwell v. Google LLC

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Google hired Bobbie as lead trial counsel to represent the company in a putative class action complaint brought on behalf of minors residing in Illinois. The complaint alleged that Google’s G Suite for Education, a group of computer applications used by many school districts, violates Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) and California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.

Weeks, et al. v. Google LLC

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Bobbie secured a favorable settlement for Google in a putative consumer class action brought by a group of Pixel 1 and Pixel XL smartphone buyers shortly after Google filed its opposition to plaintiffs’ class certification motion. The court granted final approval of the settlement.

Doe v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Three Jane Doe plaintiffs sued Uber, Rasier LLC, and Rasier-CA LLC (Uber Defendants) alleging sexual assault by third-party criminal assailants when they mistakenly entered the assailants’ vehicles after engaging the Uber app. The court granted a demurrer. The matter is ongoing.

In re Nest Labs Litigation

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represents Nest Labs, Inc., a Google subsidiary in consolidated class actions involving the cutting edge Nest Learning Thermostat. These are a series of class actions alleging that the Nest Learning Thermostat was designed improperly and does not provide energy savings and other benefits promised.

Pimental v. Google Inc. and Slide Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Lead trial counsel for Google in a putative class action alleging violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

First Data Corporation

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Represented First Data Corporation in multiple consumer class actions related to credit card and processing equipment and services in California, New York, and New Jersey. Recently defeated class certification in New Jersey case.

craigslist Inc.

Lead trial counsel for craigslist in multiple class actions alleging violation of the Song-Beverly Act. Obtained dismissal of the case without leave to amend.

Google Inc.

Represented Google Inc. in class action litigation alleging violation of state and federal wiretap laws.

Willard R. Brown v. The American Tobacco Company Inc., et al.; Danielle Devins v. The American Tobacco Company; The Republic of the Marshall Islands v. The American Tobacco Company Inc., et al.*

Obtained more than 70 dismissals at the pre-trial stage of state unfair business practices cases under §17200 cases against R.J. Reynolds. Several of the cases were multibillion-dollar class action cases disposed in California and overseas at the class certification stage or on summary judgment, never making it to trial.

* Prior Experience

Reactx LLC v. Google Inc.

Lead trial counsel in a hard-fought trade secrets/breach of contract matter for Google in which the plaintiff is seeking over $100 million in damages by alleging Google stole its “technology” and used it to create AdSense Auto Ads. The Court sustained Google’s Demurrer and dismissed the last three claims, finding they were preempted by California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act.

Intersil v. Monolithic Power Systems

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Monolithic Power Systems in ongoing litigation in the District of Delaware against its competitor Intersil Corporation (now known as Renesas Electronics America Inc.) where Monolithic Power Systems has asserted claims for trade secret misappropriation, tortious interference, disparagement, defamation, and unfair competition.

SMC Networks Inc. v. Hitron Americas Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Lead trial counsel for Hitron Americas Inc. and its former officers in litigation involving various claims including misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition. The alleged misappropriation of trade secrets involving the cable modem industry.

Electronics For Imaging Inc. v. Pegasus Technologies Ltd.*

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented EFI in this case where an Israeli company agreed to develop an electronic whiteboard. After multiple failed attempts by Pegasus, EFI developed the technology on its own. After seeking declaratory relief, Pegasus counterclaimed for theft of trade secrets and patent infringement. The case was settled on favorable terms and included a license agreement.

Adaptec Inc. v. Brocade Communications Systems Inc., et al.*

Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara
Represented plaintiff in substantial litigation involving trade secret misappropriation and breach of confidentiality agreement. After expedited discovery and a preliminary injunction were obtained against the defendants, the corporate defendant terminated two individual defendants. Ultimately, the team achieved a favorable financial settlement with the corporate defendant and obtained significant non-monetary relief from all defendants.

* Prior Experience

Yeung Bing Kwong Kenneth v. Yeung Chai Shing Holding Co.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Bobbie is leading the defense of a derivative action involving allegations of a fraudulent tax scheme, a RICO violation, and six other claims. She argued the motion to dismiss which was granted by the court.

Monster, LLC et al v. Beats Electronics, LLC et al

Second District Court of Appeal, California
Represented HTC America Holding Inc.as co-lead trial in a high-profile fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition case on appeal in the 2nd District Court of Appeal, California.

Broadcom

Provide legal advice on intellectual property and patent litigation matters.

craigslist Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division
Represented craigslist in litigation involving scrapping, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, copyright and trademark claims. Defeated motion to dismiss CFAA claims.

craigslist Inc.

Represented craigslist Inc. in multiple lawsuits involving challenges to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Obtained dismissal of Section 230 action after summary judgment, and obtained dismissal with prejudice on issue of first impression involving whether Song-Beverly Act applied to online transactions.

Google Inc. v. Jackman

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division
Represent Google in litigation against online pharmaceutical sellers for using AdWords advertising network for unauthorized purposes.

In Marriage Cases*

Appointed as lead pro bono counsel by the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office to represent the City, Mayor Gavin Newsom, and Assessor-Recorder Mabel Teng in San Francisco’s civil rights litigation over same-sex marriage. Bill Lockyer v. City & County of San Francisco (Cal. Supreme Ct.); Barbara Lewis, et al. v. Nancy Alfaro as County Clerk etc. (Cal. Supreme Ct.); City and County of San Francisco v. State of California, et al. (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco). Co-counsel with the City in its victory before trial court and the California Supreme Court.