Evan Budaj

Applied Materials, Inc. v. Lai et al. (JAMS): Key trial team member representing counsel for individual defendant in defense of trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract claims relating to advanced tools and techniques for semiconductor fabrication.

Applied Materials, Inc. v. Mattson Technology, Inc. (Cal. Super.): Second-chair counsel for defendant in its defense of a trade secret misappropriation claim relating to advanced tools and techniques for semiconductor fabrication.

Proofpoint, Inc. v. Vade Secure, Inc. et al. (N.D. Cal.): Key trial team member representing former Chief Technology Officer of email security software company in defense of trade secret, copyright, and contract claims stemming from CTO’s departure from plaintiff company and his alleged copying of source code into competing products at subsequent employer. After a three-week trial, the jury rejected Plaintiff’s claims that CTO was the “central bad actor,” returned a verdict finding no willful misappropriation, and awarded damages of less than 1% of Plaintiff’s request.  In post-trial motions, the trial team ran the table, securing orders (1) denying a permanent injunction; (2) denying Plaintiffs’ request to reopen discovery; (3) denying pre-judgment interest; (4) eliminating any obligation the CTO could have had to contribute to the award against Vade Secure; and (6) eliminating all but $1 in nominal damages against the CTO.

Scorecard AI, Inc. v. Jesse Hu et al. (Cal. Super.): Second-chair counsel for emerging leader in AI testing space against a departed employees and his new enterprise in a trade secret dispute.  Secured a favorable result shortly after filing complaint and request for TRO.

Anduril Industries, Inc. v Salient Motion Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal): Second-chair counsel for Salient Motion and two of its co-founders in their defense of trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract claims relating to algorithms and code utilized by advanced motor controllers.

MicroVention, Inc. v. Balt USA, LLC et al. (C.D. Cal): Key member of team retained on the eve of trial to represent former Director of Research and Development in his defense of a trade secret misappropriation claim relating to catheter-based medical devices.

Software Research, Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Second-chair counsel for inventor/plaintiff in a series of patent infringement actions relating to automatic performance and regression testing of web applications. Achieved favorable results for client in numerous cases over many years.

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation v. MediaTek Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.): Represented the Australian government’s science agency and the inventor of the core technology underlying the IEEE 802.11a, g, n and ac wireless LAN (Wi-Fi) standards; obtained favorable result for CSIRO just prior to commencement of trial. 

Impulse Technology Ltd. v. Nintendo of America, Inc., et al. (N.D. Ohio): Represented videogame developer Defendants Electronic Arts, Inc., THQ, and Majesco in patent infringement action relating to Nintendo Wii exertion tracking technology.  Defendants obtained stipulated dismissal with prejudice following a comprehensive win at claim construction.

Impulse Technology Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp. et al. (D. Del.): Represented Microsoft and numerous videogame developer Defendants (including Electronic Arts, Inc. and Sega of America, Inc.) in patent infringement action relating to Microsoft Kinect movement-tracking technology.  Defendants obtained near-complete win on summary judgment and dismissal of remaining claims.

SAP AG et al. v. Datatern, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.): Represented declaratory judgment Plaintiffs SAP AG and SAP America, Inc. in patent infringement action relating to relational database technologies.  SAP and co-defendant Microsoft Corp. obtained a decisive win at claim construction, forcing Datatern to concede that it could not prove infringement.

Microsoft Corp. v. Datatern, Inc.; SAP AG v. Datatern, Inc. (Fed. Cir.): On the brief for plaintiffs-appellees Microsoft and SAP.  Obtained affirmance of all grounds for summary judgment of noninfringement.

Eolas Technologies Inc. v. Adobe Systems Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.): Trial team member representing Amazon.com, Inc. and Yahoo Inc. in patent infringement action relating to technology for embedding interactive objects in webpages.  Defendants successfully invalidated the patents-in-suit in a joint bifurcated invalidity-only trial.

Confidential client (Arbitration): Served as co-counsel for one of the world’s largest chip manufacturers, defeating claims seeking over $500 million dollars in damages, and winning an award of attorneys’ fees in an international arbitration over alleged breach of an intellectual property license.

Confidential client (Arbitration) – Represented one of the world’s largest technology companies in multiple matters. Second-chair counsel in one matter regarding claims for assignment of patents relating to computer vision technology and autonomous vehicle systems; obtained favorable result following arbitration hearing.  First-chair counsel in another matter relating to the public dissemination of confidential company information; obtained favorable result after filing comprehensive spoliation motion against Respondent.