Christine Yun Sauer focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation and patent office trials. Ms. Yun Sauer represents plaintiffs and defendants ranging from individual inventors to Fortune 500 companies across a vast range of technologies. For example, Ms. Yun Sauer has handled cases involving semiconductor fabrication and packaging, hearing aids, contact lenses, hemostatic powders, DNA sequencing, Ethernet technology, and GPS-related mobile communications technology. Ms. Yun Sauer has handled cases in numerous venues across the country, including courts that handle large numbers of patent cases like the Eastern District of Texas, Northern District of California, Northern District of Illinois, and District of Minnesota and including jury trial experience in complex, multi-million dollar patent litigations.
Additionally, Ms. Yun Sauer has experience analyzing and valuating the economic impact of patented technologies.
Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP, Ms. Yun Sauer served in the following roles: Judicial Extern to the Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, U.S. District Court, Minnesota (Fall 2009); Judicial Extern to the Honorable Mark S. Wernick, Hennepin County District Court (Spring 2009); Legal Intern, Case Western Reserve University: Milton Kramer Law Clinic (2005-2007); Legal Intern, Office of the Washington, D.C. Attorney General: Child Protection Services (2005).
Promega Corporation v. Applied Biosystems, LLC, Life Technologies Corporation, and California Institute of Technology: Judge Richard A. Posner ruled in favor of our client, Promega Corporation, in a suit that it initiated against one of its competitors. In an opinion dated June 12, 2013 from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Judge Posner ruled that certain claims of U.S. Patent No. RE43,096, asserted against Promega, are invalid. Promega prevailed in its arguments that the claims of the '096 patent were invalid due to the breadth of the claim constructions that Defendants sought and obtained. Certain asserted claims were invalid for lack of written description support. While the patent describes an improvement to DNA sequencing, the breadth of the claims encompassed technologies that Caltech did not invent, including the PCR-based methods on which Promega's accused products are based. The asserted claims were additionally invalid as anticipated or obvious in view of the prior art, including a prior art patent to Caltech, which expired years ago. Judge Posner also found certain claims invalid for obviousness type double patenting. Defendants appealed various aspects of Judge Posner’s decision and the judgment. Six days after oral argument, the Federal Circuit summarily affirmed the judgment, awarding Promega a complete victory in the case.
U.S. Ethernet Innovations v. Digi International, Inc. et al.: Defense counsel for Digi International, Inc. in a patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas concerning Ethernet technology. Resolved on confidential terms prior to litigation.
Represented one of the world leading hearing aid manufacturers in patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas and the District of Minnesota. The case involved technology related to adjustable null placement. A settlement was reached at a very early stage in the case.
Medafor v. Hemostasis: Represented Medafor in a patent enforcement action involving hemostatic powder technology.
Trial counsel for the Guardian ad Litem of a child in In re A.M.C. Following a three-day trial a district court granted the Guardian’s petition to terminate the parental rights of the parents' and place the child up for adoption.
Other cases include trial experience to jury verdicts in complex, multi-million dollar patent litigation in multiple forums. Technologies include medical devices and computer hardware and software.
Represented Xerox in the defense of a patent litigation lawsuit brought by U.S. Ethernet Innovations in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case settled after Xerox filed summary judgment and Daubert motions.
- HCBA Board of Directors, Board Member
- HCBA Diversity and Inclusion Committee, Co-Chair
- HCBA Minority Clerkship Program, Chair
- Everybody Wins! Minnesota Reading Program, Volunteer
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.