. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.




The plaintiff brought suit alleging that the defendants willfully infringed on two of the plaintiff’s patents as they related to wireless and prepaid billing services. The defendant disputed that the patents were valid and that there was any infringement.

In ________, Freedom Wireless began patenting technology that allows customers making prepaid telephone calls to avoid dialing identification codes or calling toll-free numbers. Freedom owns two patents, United States Patent Nos. ________ and ________, related to prepaid wireless systems and methods. The plaintiff brought suit against defendants Boston Communications, Cingular Wireless, AT&T Wireless, CMT Partners and Western Wireless. The defendants all provide and sell or have provided and sold prepaid wireless services.

The defendant Boston Communications, the lead defendant in this case, provides billing services to some of the nation’s largest cellular carriers. The plaintiff brought suit against Boston Communications and the other defendants alleging that the defendants’’ provision and sale of prepaid wireless service infringes on the plaintiff’s patents regarding this technology and that this infringement is willful.

The defendant, Boston Communication, and the other defendants maintained that the plaintiff’s patents are invalid and there is no infringement.

The matter was tried by a jury over a ten-week period. After one week of jury deliberations, the jury returned its verdict in favor of the plaintiff and awarded damages of $________. The damages were allocated among the defendants as follows: Cingular Wireless and Boston Communications Group - $________; AT&T Wireless and Boston Communications Group - $________; CMT Partners and Boston Communications Group - $________; Western Wireless and Boston Communications Group - $________. There are various post-trial applications pending.

Plaintiff’s technical expert: Richard Levine, P.E. from Richardson, Texas. Plaintiff’s damage experts: Richard Harris, Esq. of Greenberg Traurig from Chicago, Illinois and Russell Parr, CFA, ASA from Yardley, Pennsylvania. Defendant’s technical expert: Stephen B. Wicker, Ph.D. from Ithaca, New York. Defendant’s patent procedure expert: Don W. Martens, Esq. of Knobb Martens Olson & Bear from Irvine, California. Defendant’s damage expert: Professor Gerald Hausman from Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Freedom Wireless, Inc. vs. Boston Communications Group, Inc., et al. Case no. 00-CV-________-EFH; Judge Edward F. Harrington, 5-20-05.

Attorneys for plaintiff: William C. Price, Christopher Tayback, Steven M. Anderson, Marshall M. Searcy, Diane Hutnyan, Aimee DeSantis and Erica Taggart of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP in Los Angeles, CA. Attorney for defendants: Michael B. Keating, Philip C. Swain and Vickie L. Henry of Foley Hoag, LLP in Boston, MA. and Denis R. Salmon and Monique Drake of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Los Angeles, CA. 37 3 

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.

Your cart is empty
Let Our expert Researchers Do The Searching For You! Pro Search Service