Case Studies


Uber Technologies

Irell & Manella secured a major victory for Uber Technologies, defending it against a securities fraud class action filed by a retirement fund claiming that Uber made false statements that harmed investors. The fund sought billions in damages under California’s market manipulation statute. At the outset of the case and over the plaintiff’s vigorous opposition, Irell obtained a stay of discovery pending resolution of Uber’s motion to dismiss. While such discovery stays are automatic under federal securities law, they are rarely granted in cases brought under California state law. The team ultimately secured the complete dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, followed by a second complete dismissal of the amended complaint with prejudice. In May 2021, the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal, ruling that the plaintiff failed to establish a direct link between the alleged misstatements and Uber’s stock price drop, setting a precedent for the causation pleading standard in California market manipulation claims. This ruling protected Uber from significant damages and set a high bar for future plaintiffs.


USAA

Irell has achieved a series of significant victories for USAA—a member-owned association that provides financial services to military service members, veterans and their families— in protecting its patented mobile check deposit innovations. In the span of two months in late 2019 and early 2020, these victories included a jury verdict against Wells Fargo of willful infringement and $200 million in damages on one set of patents, and a second jury verdict against Wells Fargo of willful infringement and $102 million in damages on a second set of patents. More recently, Irell represented USAA in a patent infringement suit against Truist Bank asserting infringement of five of USAA’s mobile deposit patents, which settled favorably in October 2023.


DePuy Synthes 

DePuy Synthes, a unit of Johnson & Johnson, patented specialized surgical implants that are used in medical procedures for injured animals. Veterinary Orthopaedic Implants (VOI) began selling plates and screws for canine knee surgeries that infringed on two of DePuy’s patents. DePuy filed a patent infringement lawsuit against VOI and Fidelio Capital AB in Florida federal court. In January 2023, after just an hour of deliberation, a jury in the Middle District of Florida found that VOI and Fidelio Capital willfully infringed both of DePuy’s patents and awarded the full $59.5 million in damages requested. Building on this victory, Irell secured a permanent injunction in February 2023, barring the defendants from marketing or selling the infringing products. When evidence emerged that VOI and Fidelio Capital conducted a "fire sale" of their devices despite the injunction, DePuy filed a motion for contempt and initiated an evidentiary hearing. The pressure from the contempt proceedings led to a settlement agreement between DePuy Synthes, VOI and Fidelio Capital.


TiVo

In 1997, TiVo revolutionized television with the first commercially available DVR, protected by its key “Time Warp” patent, which allowed users to pause, rewind, fast-forward and record TV programs simultaneously. However, major companies soon incorporated TiVo’s technology without permission. Over the course of more than a decade, Irell represented TiVo in its battles against some of the largest media companies, securing victories across multiple district courts, the International Trade Commission and the Federal Circuit, including three trials, numerous trips to the federal circuit and settlements. Through these efforts, TiVo collected more than $1.7 billion in damages and settlements from companies like EchoStar, Motorola, Cisco, AT&T and Verizon. This success not only protected TiVo’s innovation, but also set a precedent for startups and inventors, demonstrating that patented technologies can be defended against even the largest corporations. Irell continued to support TiVo in securing additional value through licensing deals, helping the company generate billions of dollars from its pioneering innovations.


Gilead Sciences

Following Gilead Sciences' acquisition of Calistoga Pharmaceuticals, Shareholder Representative Services (SRS), representing Calistoga's security holders, sued Gilead alleging that Gilead owed a milestone payment under the merger agreement related to an approval for a cancer drug, Zydelig. Irell approached the case as both a contract dispute and a complex scientific issue, delving into drug science and regulatory requirements to argue that the milestone payment was only due upon approval for a first-line treatment of a recognized disease, which had not occurred. After a week-long trial and extensive post-trial briefing, the Delaware Chancery Court ruled in Gilead’s favor. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, securing victory for Gilead.

Jump to Page
Close