Laura is a trial lawyer with over a decade of experience in all aspects of intellectual property litigation, from pre-suit investigation to appellate review.
Laura’s practice focuses on trademark and patent disputes in federal courts as well as trademark disputes before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Laura also has experience litigating trade secret, false advertising, and copyright claims. Laura is very efficient and offers practical advice to help clients successfully resolve complex disputes.
- Represented large manufacturer of recreational vehicles in trademark infringement case. Laura succeeded in obtaining a dismissal of the plaintiff’s damages claim that helped lead to a favorable settlement that allowed the client to continue using its trademark.
- Obtained a permanent injunction requiring a competitor to change its logos and color scheme in a trademark infringement lawsuit filed by a restaurant franchisor.
- Negotiated a favorable co-existence agreement in a cancellation proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that resulted in the client obtaining its federal trademark registration despite an earlier rejection due to likelihood of confusion with the opponent’s registered mark.
- Filed a trademark infringement action in federal court on behalf of a restaurant franchisor when correspondence with an infringing competitor went unanswered. The defendant quickly agreed to a consent judgment and payment of a confidential sum.
- Tried the damages portion of a patent infringement case in the District of Nebraska. The only remaining issues at trial were damages, willfulness and the validity of the patents-in-suit. The opponent sought a 20% royalty as infringement damages. Laura convinced the jury to reject the opponent’s excessively high rate and impose a royalty less than the client had offered to stipulate to earlier in the case.
- Member of the victorious trial team in a patent infringement case in the Eastern District of Texas. The client, a manufacturer of display stands, faced an opponent seeking $65 million in damages, plus enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees. The client was thrilled when the jury rejected the exorbitant amount sought by its opponent and reached a damages verdict far less than what the opponent demanded in settlement discussions.
- Member of the trial team that successfully represented a company against one of its former producers. The former producer had secretly developed and begun selling a competing product in violation of the parties’ production agreement. At trial, the jury awarded the client damages for sales of the competing product, and the client was awarded the patent rights associated with the competing product.
- Successfully defended medical device company against a misappropriation of trade secrets claim brought by another company.
- Successfully brought a motion for a temporary restraining order against a former employee of a client that resulted in a favorable settlement, including a permanent injunction and payment of a confidential sum.
- Represented employer in a misappropriation of trade secrets case brought against former employees who attempted to start a competing business.
- Assisted with a non-compete case against an insurance company who hired former employees of a competitor.
- Successfully argued a motion to dismiss in a false advertising case brought by a well-known provider of landscape products against a manufacturer of a soil monitoring system.
- Obtained a favorable settlement for a manufacturer and distributor of automotive aftermarket products after it was accused of making false claims in its advertising materials.
- Successfully defended false advertising counterclaims brought against a medical device manufacturer.
- Negotiated the payment of a confidential sum to a photographer for continued use of its copyrighted photographs.
- Obtained a favorable settlement for a local clinic when it was accused of using copyrighted photographs beyond the terms of its license by a stock photo library.
- Represented a manufacturer of sports merchandise in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by an individual who claimed to have created a hat worn by football fans.
Articles & Presentations
Relying On Assumptions in Your Complaint May Subject You to An Exceptional Case Finding and Award Of Attorneys’ Fees
May 8, 2017
In M-I Drilling Fluids UK Ltd. v. Dynamic Air Inc., Chief Judge Tunheim recently adopted the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bowbeer, finding the case to be exceptional and awarding attorneys’ fees against Plaintiff M-I.Read More
January 9, 2017
In Solutran, Inc. v. Elavon, Inc. and U.S. Bancorp, Magistrate Judge Thorson recently granted the defendants’ motion to compel the production of three slides in a PowerPoint presentation that plaintiff claimed were protected by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. Plaintiff initially produced the entire presentation, which included a section discussing patent litigation. The slides in that section were drafted by plaintiff’s attorneys and included the law firm’s logo. When the presentation was used in a deposition, plaintiff immediately clawed it back and subsequently produced a new version with the three slides at issue redacted.Read More
November 4, 2015
On October 19, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in two cases in which patent owners are challenging the Federal Circuit’s rigid standard for proving willful infringement. In their petitions, both patent owners compared the current test for enhanced damages to the Federal Circuit’s old test for attorney’s fees, which the Supreme Court tossed out last year in Octane Fitness LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.Read More
District of Minnesota Orders Patentee to Reduce Number of Asserted Claims After Filing Joint Claim Construction Statement
August 17, 2015
In May, the District of Minnesota ordered the parties in a patent case to meet and confer to try to reach an agreement regarding the deadline by which the patentee must reduce the number of asserted claims.Read More
June 4, 2015
Patent holders bringing infringement suits sometimes unnecessarily assert that a competitor infringes an unreasonable number of patent claims. Courts have the authority and discretion to reasonably limit the number of asserted claims in order to combat potential abuse. When that reduction should occur is less certain.Read More
May 1, 2015
Magistrate Judge Bowbeer recently granted Plaintiff Polaris Industries Inc.’s motion for a protective order preventing testimony on a Rule 30(b)(6) topic relating to disputed prior art.Read More
Limelight Decision Opens the Door to Challenge Federal Circuit’s Standard for Direct Infringement of a Method Claim
June 30, 2014
The United States Supreme Court recently confirmed the long-standing law regarding inducement of infringement in their decision in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. Patent holders should read more for an analysis of the decision.Read More
The Supreme Court Decides that False Advertising Standing Requires Economic or Reputational Injury Proximately Caused by Defendant’s Advertising
March 27, 2014
On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court decided the relevant test for determining if a plaintiff has standing to sue for false advertising in the case of Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.Read More
Honors & Education
- University of Iowa, J.D., 2006, with distinction
- Illinois Wesleyan University, B.A., 2003, magna cum laude
- Minnesota, 2006
- United States District Court, District of Minnesota, 2006
- United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 2007
- Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, 2008
- United States District Court, District of Colorado, 2012
- United States District Court, District of North Dakota, 2014
- Minnesota State Bar Association, North Star Lawyer, 2012
- Federal Bar Association
- Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association
- Advertising Federation of Minnesota, former board member and legislative committee chair