George L. Kanabe

Partner

San Francisco


Read full biography at www.orrick.com
Faced with complex technology, contentious rivals and high stakes, George Kanabe calmly guides clients through difficult intellectual property matters. Applying a process-oriented approach tailored to defined business goals, he carefully delves into each critical detail to give his clients effective solutions and peace of mind.

George’s patent agent and engineering background gives him the perspective that few litigators possess. Having spent years on the prosecution / portfolio management side as well as the contentious side, George has developed a 360-degree view of IP matters, enabling him to craft more effective strategies. Additionally, George’s years practicing in New York, Atlanta, Silicon Valley and San Francisco have broadened his jurisdictional perspective.

He represents individuals and companies ranging from startups to Fortune 500 companies, and everything in between, on all aspects of IP law and disputes, with an emphasis on litigation, due diligence and licensing. As a registered practitioner before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, he also has significant experience drafting and prosecuting patent applications, as well as challenging issued patents via post-grant administrative proceedings.

George has represented clients in a variety of technological fields, including the electrical arts, software and cloud computing, telecommunications, mechanical and medical devices, and financial services.

The following is a sample of George’s current and past representations.   

  • Auburn University v. IBM (M.D. Al.). Represented Auburn in patent infringement suit relating to reliability selection of dies on semiconductor wafers.
  • CardSoft v. First Data (E.D. Tex.). Represented First Data Corporation in two-patent case involving operating systems for credit and debit card reader PoS (Point of Sale) terminals.
  • CardSoft v. VeriFone and Hypercom (E.D. Tex.). Represented VeriFone et al. in infringement cases involving patents directed to Virtual Machine functionality for credit card payment terminals.
  • Document Generation Corporation v. McKesson (S.D. Ill. And E.D. Tex.). Represented McKesson Information Solutions, LLC in multi-defendant patent infringement claims involving medical personnel report and notes generating systems.
  • DR Systems v. McKesson (S.D. Cal.). Represented McKesson Information Solutions, LLC in multi-defendant patent infringement claim involving Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS).
  • Enzo Medical Systems v. Siemens (D. Del.). Represented Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc. in patent case involving RNA diagnostics equipment.
  • Extricom v. Meru Networks (D. Del.). Represented Extricom in dispute involving patent infringement claims relating to WLAN and WiFi technologies and advanced managerial functions.
  • GeoTag v Walmart (E.D. Tex.). Represented Walmart in multi-defendant patent infringement suit relating to store locator mapping technology.
  • Intellect Wireless v. HTC (N.D. Ill). Represented HTC at trial in a post-Therasense inequitable conduct trial resulting in a full defense judgment.
  • LBS Innovations v Walmart (E.D. Tex.). Represented Walmart in multi-defendant patent infringement suit relating to wireless system for providing information about proximate destinations to mobile devices.
  • Mohawk Brands v. Shaw Industries Group (N.D. Ga.). Represented Shaw in multi-patent infringement suit relating to carpet tiles.
  • NICE Systems and STS Software v Witness Systems (N.D. Ga. and D. Del.). Represented Witness Systems, Inc., now part of Verint, in multiple (offensive and defensive) patent infringement suits involving more than a dozen patents in the fields of telecommunications, voice recording, agent monitoring, and VOIP conferencing and recording.
  • Novitaz v. Shopkick (D. Conn. and N.D. Cal.E.D. Tex.). Represented Shopkick in multi-patent case involving retail and shopping applications and technologies.
  • Openwave Systems v. 724 Solutions (N.D. Cal.). Represented 724 Solutions in dispute involving mobile device web interface and data rendering systems.
  • Radiant Systems v. Ameranth (N.D. Ga.). Represented Radiant Systems, Inc., declaratory judgment plaintiff, in patent infringement claim involving point of sale computing systems.
  • RBIDR v. Airbnb (D. Del.). Represented Airbnb in patent case involving methods for selling time-based inventory over a communications network.
  • Siemens v. SIPCO (N.D. Ga.). Represented plaintiff Siemens Industry, Inc. in license and patent infringement dispute involving networking technologies.
  • Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same and Products Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-855). Represented respondent Monster Cable Products, Inc. before the ITC in an investigation concerning technology for manufacturing magnets deployed in audio products.
  • TQ Delta v. DIRECTV (D. Del.). Represented DIRECTV in eight patent case involving DSL-related patents as applied to the MoCA (Multimedia over Coax Alliance) standards and compliant products and services.

Posts by: George L. Kanabe

PILLOW TALK: A Threat to Trade Secrets?

It turns out that, even in romantic relationships, some things are best kept secret.  On July 7, 2017, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging that a former executive disclosed confidential information to a romantic partner who happens to be an executive of one of Teva’s direct competitors. READ MORE

(Alleged) Spammer Squares Off With (Alleged) Hacker, Highlighting Risk of Cyber Threats

What’s in a name?  Obviously a lot, as businesses in all industries invest significant time and money to protect their reputations.  But, in some sectors, the line between positive and pejorative can be quite thin.

Take email marketing and cybersecurity, for example:  What exactly distinguishes a successful high-volume email marketer from a spammer?  And how can we distinguish a well-intentioned security analyst exposing vulnerabilities from a nefarious hacker?  (Those familiar with techspeak will surely recall the familiar “white hat” and “black hat” dichotomy, but even that, as Wired has observed, is subject to gray areas of its own.) READ MORE