On Wednesday, April 29, 2009, Martin R. Lueck, chairman of the firm's executive board, was honored by Finance and Commerce. Mr. Lueck was named one of "40 Minnesotans on the Move." These honorees are identified by Finance and Commerce as "Minnesotans who are poised to make business history of their own during the coming years."
Martin Lueck is Chairman of the Executive Board, was chair of the firm's Business Litigation group from 1999-2009, and has served on the firm's Executive Board since 1996. He is a trial lawyer experienced in civil trial and appeals, arbitration and administrative hearings of all types in the substantive areas of commercial litigation, patent, antitrust, and competition law.
Elected in February 2008 as the firm's chairman, Mr. Lueck is a proven leader, a committed legal advocate and an exceptional trial attorney. He is strongly committed to three things: excellence in the courtroom, a willingness to share risk with firm clients, and a commitment to represent all segments of society, a philosophy instilled by the firm's founder, Solly Robins.
Mr. Lueck demonstrates a track record of being recognized by his peers and for his outstanding work in several leading legal industry publications:
- Listed in Marquis Who's Who in the World (2009)
- Named one of "500 Leading Lawyers in America," Lawdragon (2008)
- Ranked #1 in Minnesota for Litigation: Intellectual Property in Chambers USA (2008)
- According to Chambers USA's profile "Martin Lueck is an IP litigator known to be 'very good at boiling things down for juries.' This has led to some 'spectacular results for clients,' including Honeywell, and a jury verdict in favor of Eolas Technologies and the University of California on issues of infringement, validity, and damages in the region of $520 million. Keen to stress that these are not freak results, peers enviously noted that 'he wins a lot.'"
- Listed in "The Best Lawyers in America" (2006, 2007, 2008)
- Awarded "Distinguished Alumnus Award" by Winona State University (2005)
- Named one of 10 of the Nation's Top Litigators by The National Law Journal (2004)
- Selected as one of Minnesota Lawyer's 15 "Attorneys of the Year" (2003)
- Named a "Super Lawyer," Minnesota Law & Politics (2006)
He is an esteemed fellow and member of two prestigious organizations:
Membership in the Academy is limited to 500 Fellows from the United States. According to the Academy, the qualifications for membership are very high and the consideration of nominees is thorough. Outstanding skills and extensive experience as a trial lawyer, unimpeachable personal and professional character, integrity and honesty, are but a few of the necessary qualities of each Fellow.
Fellowship in the College is extended only by invitation, and only after careful investigation, to those experienced trial lawyers who have mastered the art of advocacy and whose professional careers have been marked by the highest standards of ethical conduct, professionalism, civility and collegiality, according to the College.
He is a member of several legal organizations including:
- Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association
- American Intellectual Property Law Association
- American Bar Association
- Training the Trial Lawyer Task Force, American Bar Association
- Hennepin County Bar Association
- Federal Circuit Bar Association
- American Association for Justice (formerly the Association of Trial Lawyers of America)
- International Bar Association
Mr. Lueck became a partner at the firm in 1991. He joined the firm after graduating from William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul, cum laude, in 1984. He currently serves on the law school's Board of Trustees.
In 2003, Mr. Lueck and his litigation teams secured two large jury awards for patent infringement lawsuits for his clients: $520.6 million for Eolas Technologies against Microsoft, and $30 million for Honeywell against JVC. The Eolas verdict was recognized as the third largest jury verdict of 2003, according to the National Law Journal, and the Honeywell verdict ranked #64 out of the top 100 for the year. In addition, he represented ExxonMobil Chemical Company on patents and licensee matters, he defended General Electric in a patent infringement action brought by General Motors in 2005, and defended UNOCAL against the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust allegations based on reformulated gasoline patents in 2003.
With a known reputation for his outstanding skills as a trial lawyer, Mr. Lueck has had many high profile, notable cases involving hundreds of millions of dollars, which resulted in him being named as one of the top 10 litigators in the country by The National Law Journal. A sampling of case descriptions below gives reason for national corporations to continue seeking his counsel:
Eolas Technologies, Inc. and The Regents of the University of California v. Microsoft Corporation (2004): Co-lead counsel on behalf of Eolas Technologies, Inc. and the Regents of the University of California, in action for patent infringement of web browser technology for the delivery of interactive applications embedded in web pages. The case was tried in United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Chicago, Illinois, Zagel, Judge. Jury verdict in favor of Eolas and the University of California, on issues of infringement, validity, and damages in August 2003, in the amount of $520.6 million. On January 14, 2004, the court entered judgment for $565,894,868 which includes the amount of the original verdict plus prejudgment interest. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the finding of infringement and the damages award, and ordered that Microsoft's invalidity and inequitable conduct defenses be retried. The case settled on a confidential basis four days before the start of the invalidity trial.
Premier Retail Networks v. Advanced Communication Design. (Advanced Communication Design, Inc. v. Premier Retail Networks, Inc., (Case No. 01-1271, 1272, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) Sept. 23, 2002). District of Minnesota, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Mr. Lueck was retained by defendant Premier Retail Networks after entry of a default judgment. Also entered was an injunction against sale of virtually Premier's entire product line. Successfully argued in Federal Circuit for vacatur of the default judgment and dissolution of injunctive relief. Case was settled on remand.
UNOCAL Corp. v. ARCO, Chevron, Exxon, Mobil, Shell and Texaco (1997):
Co-lead counsel in action for patent infringement case over UNOCAL's patent on gasoline. Jury verdict for $69 million in favor of UNOCAL on liability and damages and court judgment also in favor of UNOCAL on defendants' claims that patent was unenforceable. With interest and attorney fees, the judgment in favor of UNOCAL amounted to $91 million. Verdict upheld on appeal.
Honeywell Inc. v. Victor Company of Japan and U. S. JVC Corp. (2003): Trial counsel on behalf of Honeywell Inc., in action for patent infringement of color filters in video cameras. The case was tried in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, Frank, Judge. Jury verdict in favor of Honeywell for $30 million, which reflects royalties of two percent of JVC's sales of the accused camcorders to calculate past damages for the unlicensed use of the technology.
Fonar v. General Electric Co. (1997): Co-lead counsel in action for patent infringement of two magnetic resonance imaging patents. At trial the jury awarded Fonar $110.5 million. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed almost the entire award, ordering General Electric to pay $103.4 million, reported at the time to be the largest patent infringement jury verdict ever upheld on appeal (IP Worldwide). Fonar Corporation v. General Electric Co., 107 F.3d 1543 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 266 (1997). After the Supreme Court denied certiorari, General Electric paid Fonar $128 million (judgment plus interest).
Electromotive Division of General Motors Corporation v. Transportation Systems Division of General Electric Co., et al. (2005): Defended General Electric in a patent infringement action brought by General Motors involving planetary and compressor bearings used in diesel locomotive engines. Summary judgment which found invalidity of the patents on the basis of on-sale bar was upheld by the Federal Circuit in Electromotive Div. of General Motors Corp. v. Transportation Systems Div. of General Elec. Co., 417 F.3d 1203, 75 U.S.P.Q.2d 1650.
Being named to the list or receiving the award is not intended and should not be viewed as comparative to other lawyers or to create an expectation about results that might be achieved in a future matter.