John K. Harting

John Harting is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on large-scale and complex intellectual property and commercial disputes. He represents both plaintiffs and defendants on both sides of the “v,” and has experience in forums including district courts across the country, the Federal Circuit, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

John has helped his clients obtain more than $300 million in settlements and judgments, and has successfully defended numerous clients against significant liability allegations.

He has participated in numerous trials across the United States and in the ITC, including:

• Representing a Fortune 100 electronics retailer as a defendant in a multi-phased trial in the Eastern District of Texas.
• Representing a patent owner in an eight-day evidentiary hearing at the ITC related to wireless communications technologies, including standard essential patents.
• Representing a patent owner in a four-week patent infringement trial related to coaxial cable connectors culminating in a successful jury verdict, damages award, and a permanent injunction against 60 different products. The verdict was summarily affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
• Representing a patent owner in a patent infringement trial in the Western District of Texas related to computer networking technologies.
• Representing a Fortune 50 health insurance company as a plaintiff in a fraud-related bench trial in the Northern District of Florida.
• Representing a Fortune 5 health insurance company as both a plaintiff and a defendant in a two-week breach of contract and fraud-related bench trial in the Western District of Texas.

John has represented clients ranging in size from independent inventors to Fortune 5 companies, in matters involving varied technologies including semiconductors, telecommunications, computer networking, medical devices, point-of-sale and payment processing, wireless communications standards, USB, and computer-graphics related technologies.

John has also represented clients in numerous disputes involving copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and alleged antitrust violations, as well as in business litigation disputes involving breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, and banking and securities regulations.

John seeks to provide maximum benefit to his clients by gaining a complete understanding of their business and litigation goals and then working together with the client to develop an appropriate strategy to achieve them.

Education

• University of Minnesota Law School, J.D., magna cum laude, Order of the Coif (2011); Managing Editor, Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology (2010-2011)
• University of Minnesota, B.S. in Environmental Sciences, Policies and Management and Minor in Applied Economics (2008)

Representative Matters

Wapp Tech Limited Partnership v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (E.D. Tex. No. 4:21-cv-00671): Represented plaintiff Wapp Tech in patent infringement litigation against Wells Fargo in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Asserted infringement of five patents covering technologies relating to mobile application development and testing. Case resolved successfully on confidential terms prior to trial.

Trane v. William A. Harrison, Inc. (E.D. Tex. No. 20-cv-00084): Represented Trane, a world leader in air conditioning systems, services, and solutions, in a breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secret matter in the Eastern District of Texas. Secured favorable summary judgment ruling finding breach of contract and liability under corresponding liquidated damages provision, and dismissing all remaining counterclaims. Case settled on the courthouse steps minutes prior to voir dire. 

Intel Corp. and Apple Inc. v. Fortress Investment Group LLC et al. (N.D. Cal. No. 19-cv-07651): Represented co-defendants INVT Inc. and Inventergy Global in successful defense of alleged antitrust violations resulting in dismissal of complaint with prejudice.

Source One v. Hadley Development (D. Minn. 20-cv-00787): Lead lawyer representing copyright and trademark owner in case relating to camouflage fabric pattern and associated marks; case resolved successfully on confidential terms.

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. DaVita Inc. (M.D. Fla. 19-cv-00574): Trial counsel for plaintiff Florida Blue in breach of contract and fraud case against DaVita in the Middle District of Florida. Case resolved successfully on confidential terms during trial. 

Advanced Micro Devices v. LG Electronics (N.D. Cal. No. 14-cv-01012): Represented plaintiff AMD in patent infringement litigation against LGE in the Northern District of California. Asserted infringement of nine patents covering a wide array of computer-based technologies critical to today’s high-end consumer electronics products, including patents claiming pioneering inventions in USB, GPU, thermal management, and graphics-related technologies. Case involved over 800 accused products, ranging from televisions to smartphones, BD players, projectors, and smart appliances. Successfully resolved after Markman and prior to summary judgment. 

PCT International, Inc. v. Holland Electronics, LLC (D. Ariz. No. 12-cv-01797): Represented privately owned telecommunications company in patent infringement case litigated in the District of Arizona against competitor company. Asserted infringement of patent claiming an improved coaxial cable end connector. Second-chaired four-week-long jury trial resulting in reasonable royalty award, finding of infringement by 60 products, and permanent injunction against said 60 products. Verdict was summarily affirmed by the Federal Circuit (Dkt. No. 16-1061).

Alexsam, Inc. v. Best Buy Stores L.P. (E.D. Tex. No. 2:13-cv-00002-MHS-CMC): Represented Fortune 100 retailer against patent infringement claims filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff alleged infringement of two patents, and sought more than $125 million in damages.  The case settled three days prior to a jury trial on infringement, after separate trials on invalidity and inequitable conduct. In total, the litigation spanned more than three years and involved numerous issues unique to the prepaid card industry.

Edge Capture L.L.C. et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, et al. (N.D. Ill. No. 09-cv-1521): Represented independent software vendor in the Northern District of Illinois in patent infringement matter involving automated trading technology. The claims against all defendants were resolved successfully before trial.

Spine Solutions, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., et al. (W.D. Tenn. No. 07-cv-2175): Represented defendant Medtronic in the Western District of Tennessee against infringement allegations filed by Spine Solutions related to Medtronic's artificial lumbar discs. After trial and appeal, the Federal Circuit remanded back to the district court for resolution of damages issues. The matter resolved successfully before the second trial.

• Listed in Benchmark Litigation's 40 & Under Guide (2024)
• Listed in The Best Lawyers in America (2024-2025 editions)
• Named to "Top Lawyers List," Minnesota Monthly (2024)
• Named a "North Star Lawyer" by the Minnesota State Bar Association for providing at least 50 hours of pro bono legal services (2013-2014)

Civic

• Alzheimer’s Association, Young Champions Advocacy Committee

Professional

• Federal Bar Association
• Minnesota State Bar Association
• Hennepin County Bar Association

Speeches

• Structuring IP Finance Deals That Work
  2024 IP Dealmakers Forum, Miami, Florida (November 7, 2024)
• Maximizing Value in IP Portfolios: Key Strategy Considerations for Patent Monetization
  Burford Capital, Webinar (October 29, 2024)
• Maximizing Value When Acquiring or Divesting Patents for Assertion
  Co-Presenter, Minnesota IP Law Association (MIPLA) Virtual Stampede (May 19, 2021)
• Success in Patent Disputes
  University of Minnesota School of Law Student Intellectual Property Law Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota (April 11, 2018)