Sam Ernst joined the firm in 2003 and is a member of the Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group.

Experience

Mr. Ernst’s practice focuses on intellectual property and appellate litigation. Mr. Ernst has represented clients in patent, trade secret, copyright, and trademark litigation covering a wide array of technology areas. Mr. Ernst has also represented clients in appeals before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court.  Mr. Ernst has an active pro bono practice focusing on veterans disability recovery, homeless advocacy, and civil rights. In 2006, Mr. Ernst received a Certificate of Excellence from the Berkeley Food and Housing Project for his homeless advocacy.  Mr. Ernst teaches a litigation skills course entitled “Pretrial Civil Litigation Practice” at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall). Prior to joining Heller Ehrman, Mr. Ernst served as law clerk to the Honorable Timothy B. Dyk of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Representative Engagements

• Silvaco Data Systems v. Hewlett-Packard Company, et al., (Superior Court, Santa Clara County).  The firm represents Hewlett-Packard in this trade secret case involving electronic design automation (EDA) technology.
• Roche Palo Alto LLC and Allergan, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc. and Apotex Corp., (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit).  The firm represents Roche and Allergan in this patent litigation involving anti-inflammatory drugs for cataract surgery patients.
• Shaklee Corporation and NIR Diagnostics, Inc. v. Masimo Corporation, (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California).  The firm represents Masimo in this patent litigation involving patents related to spectrophotometers.
• CA, Inc. v. Simple.com, et al. (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York).  The firm represents CA in this declaratory judgment action involving three patents allegedly relating to internet portal technology.
• Hepting, et al. v. AT&T, et al. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit).  The firm represents plaintiffs in this civil rights litigation concerning alleged mass electronic surveillance of internet and telephone communications by the NSA.
• AMC Tech., L.L.C. v. SAP AG (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania).  The firm represented SAP in a copyright, trade secret, and breach of contract case involving customer relations software.
• Affymetrix, Inc. v. Multilyte Ltd. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit).  The firm represented Multilyte in a patent infringement case involving microarray technology.
• Atmel Corporation v. Agere Systems, Inc. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California).  The firm represented Atmel Corporation in this patent litigation involving digital signal processing chips.
• Champion Performance Products, Inc. v. MET-Rx Substrate Technology, Inc. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California).  The firm represented MET-Rx in a trademark dispute involving trademarks and trade dress for dietary supplements.

Publications

• Thirtieth Annual Review of Criminal Procedure, “Discovery,” with Christopher P. Del Rosso,  the Georgetown Law Journal  03.2001