Send to a friend
Jen is the Co-Managing Partner of Quinn Emanuel’s San Francisco office. Jen is a trial lawyer with extensive experience in litigating intellectual property matters. Her principal focus is on patents, in a wide range of industries, but she also frequently handles trade secret, contract, and antitrust disputes as well. In 2012, Jen obtained a complete defense verdict as trial counsel in a multi-patent jury trial in Delaware on behalf of Symantec, defeating a claim for damages exceeding $1 billion. Jen was also Yahoo!'s go to counsel when it elected to file a multi-patent lawsuit against Facebook in the Northern District of California. In 2012 The Recorder named Jen as one of its "40 Women Leader's in Law," and in 2013 the same publication named her one of the "Top 50 Women in Tech Law." In 2014, Managing Intellectual Property
named Jen an IP Star in both the United States and California. Jen is also actively involved in pro bono activities, overseeing pro bono cases within the firm and by volunteering her time to various organizations within the San Francisco community.
Represented Symantec as trial counsel in a patent action filed by Finjan in the District of Delaware involving two patents relating to network security and antivirus software. Finjan was seeking over $1 billion in past damages and running royalties against most of Symantec’s antivirus offerings. Successfully argued for and obtained reduction in damages from Court, resulting in the case going to the jury with drastically reduced risk for Symantec. Following the three-week jury trial, obtained a complete defense verdict, with a finding of non-infringement and invalidity for all asserted claims. Conducted cross and direct examinations of damages experts at trial. Finjan had previously prevailed on the same patents in the same venue against another defendant.
Represented Qualcomm Inc. in patent infringement suit brought by MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas involving microprocessor technology. Case resolved through a settlement on terms favorable to Qualcomm.
Represented Yahoo! in filing multi-patent suit against Facebook, which was resolved favorably (and quickly) for Yahoo!
Represented Bally Technologies, designer of slot machines and player tracking units, in patent litigation against IGT, obtaining summary judgment rulings on all five counts of patent infringement in D. Nevada and affirmance of rulings on appeal to the Federal Circuit.
Represented Bally Technologies in a case brought by Shuffle Master and International Gaming Technology alleging infringement of patents relating to casino table game monitoring. The Court granted Bally's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement on one of the patents asserted by Plaintiffs and granted its motion for summary judgment of obviousness on the other patent. The Court also granted Bally's motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs' claims of correction of inventorship on a number of Bally's patents.
Obtained a complete victory at the district court level in Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. BenQ America Corp., et al., representing twenty-seven cellular manufacturers and distributors (including Motorola, Samsung, Sony and others) in a patent suit involving text messaging. This case was venued in the Western District of Texas. First obtained a bifurcated trial schedule, with the first trial focused solely on the validity of the patent. While preparing for the invalidity trial, filed a successful summary judgment motion on non-infringement which resolved the case in Texas.
Part of trial team which was awarded a $9 million dollar jury verdict in a patent litigation brought in the Northern District of California on behalf of AOL subsidiary, Tegic Communications, Inc. Quinn Emanuel was brought on as lead trial counsel less then 3 months before trial, and after settlement talks had failed to resolve the dispute. Tegic's patents were found to be valid, infringed, and the jury further held such infringement was willful.
Obtained a TRO and injunction in the District Court of Nevada on behalf of Bally Technology, Inc., a gaming industry client, against the largest provider of products and services in the gaming industry, IGT, for breach of a patent pooling agreement covering cutting edge gaming technology.