DAVID R. YOHANNAN
Partner
(202) 342-8616 (202) 342-8616
DAVID R. YOHANNAN Partner
I focus on creating distinct and comprehensive strategies that enhance, fortify and leverage my clients’ intellectual property both in and out of court.

David Yohannan’s practice includes intellectual property litigation, prosecution and licensing.  David represents a wide variety of clients ranging from Fortune 50 companies to individual inventors.  Whether David is counsel to a major corporation with vast domestic and international assets or a local entrepreneur whose goal is to safeguard the intellectual property on which his or her company was founded, he strives to deliver advice that is practical, effectual, timely and considerate.

David counsels and represents clients in connection with state, federal and administrative litigation involving patent, trademark and consumer protection issues.  He advises and represents applicants for utility and design patent protection before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), particularly in mechanical, computer-implemented, telecommunications and aeronautic technologies.  David’s clients include manufacturers, researchers, service providers and trade associations seeking assistance with domestic and international matters.

In addition, David provides opinions of counsel regarding the validity and infringement of patents and trademarks.  He also advises and represents applicants for registration of trademarks, counsels and represents clients on unfair competition and trade secret matters, and coordinates the activities of foreign counsel in securing intellectual property protection internationally.

In his third decade of practice, David is skilled in working with his clients to protect their innovations and brands in today’s competitive market.  He seeks to consistently ensure that his clients maintain the competitive advantage.  Notably, David advises, prosecutes and defends clients with hundreds of millions of dollars of intellectual property assets at stake, and he is valued for his ability to tailor IP legal strategies to both long- and short-term goals.

David understands the big picture of each client’s commercial needs, as well as how their intellectual property directly impacts their bottom line.  An effective writer and influential advocate and negotiator, David is able to establish immediate credibility and trust not only with his clients, but also with their constituents, judges and

Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. v. Honeywell International, Inc. (W.D.Wash. 2016)
Representing seller of ID scanning equipment and related software solutions in defense of patent infringement action.  Case currently in fact discovery.

3rd Eye Surveillance LLC v. United States (Ct. Fed. Cl. 2015)
Representing third-party defendant in defense of patent infringement case involving video surveillance technology.

Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. v. Wizz Systems L.L.C. (W.D.Wash. 2015)
Representing reseller of ID scanning equipment and related software solutions in defense of patent infringement action.  Case currently in fact discovery.

WAG Acquisition L.L.C. v. Sobonito Investments, LTD (D.N.J. 2014)
Representing online media company in defense of patent infringement case relating to buffering systems and methods.  Case currently in jurisdictional discovery phase.

Jacobs Vehicle Systems, Inc. v. Yang (M.D.N.C. 2012)
Represented plaintiff in trade secret misappropriation case concerning engine brake technology provided to Chinese competitor.  Case settled favorably for plaintiff; defendant assigned his U.S. patents concerning the technology in dispute to plaintiff as part of settlement.

Markerts-Alert PYT. Ltd., v. OM Securities, LLC d/b/a Trademonster and Optionmonster Holdings, Inc. (D. Del. 2012)
Represented defendants in a patent infringement action accusing online stock and option trading services of infringing a business method patent.  The case was dismissed with prejudice after the patent was invalidated in a Patent Office proceeding.

Vidsys, Inc. v. Proximex Corporation (E.D. Pa. 2011)
Represented declaratory judgment plaintiff in district court action seeking a declaration of non-infringement and the invalidity of patent.  Also represented plaintiff in parallel reexamination proceeding that, after appeal, resulted in defendant’s loss of patent rights and dismissal of district court case.

Innovative Office Products, Inc. v. Humanscale Corporation (E.D. Pa. 2010)
Successful defense and dismissal of a patent infringement case with no payment to the plaintiff as result of successful parallel challenge of patent in reexamination proceeding.

Neutral Tandem, Inc. v. Peerless Network, LLC, et. al. (N.D. I11.2008)
Successful defense of a patent infringement suit including defeating motion for preliminary injunction and obtaining a judgment of invalidity of the patent.  An award of summary judgment was affirmed on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Telarix, Inc v. Vero Systems, LLC (E.D. Va. 2007)
Successful assertion of a patent infringement suit.  The case settled in favor of our client after the defendant took a license under the asserted patent.

Stena Rederi AB v. The United States et al. (Fed Cl. 2006)
Successful assertion of a Swedish shipping company’s patent on a ship hull design against the U.S. resulting in an award of $3.2 million to the client.

Intelli-Check, Inc. v. Tricom Card Technologies, Inc. et al. (E.D. NY 2003)
Successful defense of a patent infringement action resulting in a license to the client for nominal fee.

The Best Lawyers in America© (Woodward/White, Inc.), Intellectual Property–Litigation, 2013-2017.

American Intellectual Property Law Association

About

David Yohannan’s practice includes intellectual property litigation, prosecution and licensing.  David represents a wide variety of clients ranging from Fortune 50 companies to individual inventors.  Whether David is counsel to a major corporation with vast domestic and international assets or a local entrepreneur whose goal is to safeguard the intellectual property on which his or her company was founded, he strives to deliver advice that is practical, effectual, timely and considerate.

David counsels and represents clients in connection with state, federal and administrative litigation involving patent, trademark and consumer protection issues.  He advises and represents applicants for utility and design patent protection before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), particularly in mechanical, computer-implemented, telecommunications and aeronautic technologies.  David’s clients include manufacturers, researchers, service providers and trade associations seeking assistance with domestic and international matters.

In addition, David provides opinions of counsel regarding the validity and infringement of patents and trademarks.  He also advises and represents applicants for registration of trademarks, counsels and represents clients on unfair competition and trade secret matters, and coordinates the activities of foreign counsel in securing intellectual property protection internationally.

In his third decade of practice, David is skilled in working with his clients to protect their innovations and brands in today’s competitive market.  He seeks to consistently ensure that his clients maintain the competitive advantage.  Notably, David advises, prosecutes and defends clients with hundreds of millions of dollars of intellectual property assets at stake, and he is valued for his ability to tailor IP legal strategies to both long- and short-term goals.

David understands the big picture of each client’s commercial needs, as well as how their intellectual property directly impacts their bottom line.  An effective writer and influential advocate and negotiator, David is able to establish immediate credibility and trust not only with his clients, but also with their constituents, judges and

Experience

Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. v. Honeywell International, Inc. (W.D.Wash. 2016)
Representing seller of ID scanning equipment and related software solutions in defense of patent infringement action.  Case currently in fact discovery.

3rd Eye Surveillance LLC v. United States (Ct. Fed. Cl. 2015)
Representing third-party defendant in defense of patent infringement case involving video surveillance technology.

Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. v. Wizz Systems L.L.C. (W.D.Wash. 2015)
Representing reseller of ID scanning equipment and related software solutions in defense of patent infringement action.  Case currently in fact discovery.

WAG Acquisition L.L.C. v. Sobonito Investments, LTD (D.N.J. 2014)
Representing online media company in defense of patent infringement case relating to buffering systems and methods.  Case currently in jurisdictional discovery phase.

Jacobs Vehicle Systems, Inc. v. Yang (M.D.N.C. 2012)
Represented plaintiff in trade secret misappropriation case concerning engine brake technology provided to Chinese competitor.  Case settled favorably for plaintiff; defendant assigned his U.S. patents concerning the technology in dispute to plaintiff as part of settlement.

Markerts-Alert PYT. Ltd., v. OM Securities, LLC d/b/a Trademonster and Optionmonster Holdings, Inc. (D. Del. 2012)
Represented defendants in a patent infringement action accusing online stock and option trading services of infringing a business method patent.  The case was dismissed with prejudice after the patent was invalidated in a Patent Office proceeding.

Vidsys, Inc. v. Proximex Corporation (E.D. Pa. 2011)
Represented declaratory judgment plaintiff in district court action seeking a declaration of non-infringement and the invalidity of patent.  Also represented plaintiff in parallel reexamination proceeding that, after appeal, resulted in defendant’s loss of patent rights and dismissal of district court case.

Innovative Office Products, Inc. v. Humanscale Corporation (E.D. Pa. 2010)
Successful defense and dismissal of a patent infringement case with no payment to the plaintiff as result of successful parallel challenge of patent in reexamination proceeding.

Neutral Tandem, Inc. v. Peerless Network, LLC, et. al. (N.D. I11.2008)
Successful defense of a patent infringement suit including defeating motion for preliminary injunction and obtaining a judgment of invalidity of the patent.  An award of summary judgment was affirmed on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Telarix, Inc v. Vero Systems, LLC (E.D. Va. 2007)
Successful assertion of a patent infringement suit.  The case settled in favor of our client after the defendant took a license under the asserted patent.

Stena Rederi AB v. The United States et al. (Fed Cl. 2006)
Successful assertion of a Swedish shipping company’s patent on a ship hull design against the U.S. resulting in an award of $3.2 million to the client.

Intelli-Check, Inc. v. Tricom Card Technologies, Inc. et al. (E.D. NY 2003)
Successful defense of a patent infringement action resulting in a license to the client for nominal fee.

Honors

The Best Lawyers in America© (Woodward/White, Inc.), Intellectual Property–Litigation, 2013-2017.

Memberships

American Intellectual Property Law Association

Practices