Mark Supko is chair of the firm's Intellectual Property Group. He is a trial lawyer whose practice has been dedicated to IP litigation for more than 20 years, with a heavy emphasis on patent litigation in the computer, electrical and mechanical arts, serving corporate clients in diverse industries including automotive, aerospace, consumer electronics, and telecommunications. Prior to joining the firm, Mark was a partner in a leading international IP boutique; and before pursuing a career in the law, he was a systems engineer for the world's largest automaker. Mark is recognized by Chambers USA as a leading lawyer in the D.C. Intellectual Property and D.C. Intellectual Property: Litigation categories.
Mark is experienced in all aspects of patent litigation, from pre-suit investigations through trial and appeal. He has litigated patent infringement cases in federal district courts across the country, has argued appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and has handled Section 337 cases before the U.S. International Trade Commission. Mark has successfully litigated cases involving a wide variety of technologies, including automobile navigation systems, automotive braking systems, wireless communications, Internet infrastructure and applications, digital imaging, oil refining and medical devices. These cases have come in all shapes and sizes, ranging from representation of a small chemical company asserting its crown jewel patent against isolated infringers, to defending some of the largest companies in the world from patents being asserted against entire industry segments.
Mark represents clients both in enforcing their patent rights against infringers and in defending against the enforcement efforts of others, and he has considerable experience defending cases brought by non-practicing entities (NPEs). He also has experience litigating other types of intellectual property matters, including trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and trade secret misappropriation. Recently, Mark was lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in a case involving air disc brake technology that resulted in a jury verdict of willful infringement and a multi-million dollar attorneys' fee award.
In addition to litigation, Mark's practice involves counseling clients on matters relating to the acquisition, protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. He has significant experience in patent prosecution matters, reexaminations, and preparation of legal opinions relating to patent validity, enforceability and infringement. He also has been extensively involved in licensing of intellectual property, including establishment of licensing programs through both adversarial and non-adversarial means.
- Represented plaintiffs Bendix and Knorr-Bremse in a patent infringement suit against a main competitor. Following a six-day jury trial, we secured a verdict of willful infringement, a permanent injunction, compensatory and enhanced damages, and a multi-million dollar attorneys' fee award. Bendix Commercial Vehicle Systems et al. v. Haldex Brake Products, No. 1:09-CV-176 (N.D. Ohio).
- Represented respondent General Motors in a Section 337 investigation seeking to exclude importation of vehicles equipped with in-dash navigation systems. We successfully pressured the Complainant to terminate the investigation at the close of fact discovery. Certain Automotive GPS Navigation Systems, Components Thereof, And Products Containing Same ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-814 (U.S.I.T.C.).
- Represented defendant OnStar in a patent infringement action involving vehicle-based Internet communications. We forced a voluntary dismissal of the complaint with prejudice after securing a transfer to OnStar's home forum. Automotive Technologies Int'l v. OnStar, No. 4:11-CV-15604 (E.D. Mich.).
- Representing third-party defendant BAE Systems in a patent infringement action filed against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498, involving a government contract relating to laser-based missile countermeasure systems. Cheetah Omni v. United States et al., No. 1:11-CV-255 (Fed. Cl.).
- Represented defendant Vizada in a patent infringement action involving satellite communication systems, securing a favorable settlement providing the client with freedom to operate in the market for the accused technology. Advanced Media Networks v. Vizada et al., No. 1:10-CV-194 (S.D.N.Y.).
- Represented plaintiff Curtiss-Wright Flow Control in a patent infringement action against a competitor involving industrial valves used to dehead coke drums during oil refining operations. Following the grant of a preliminary injunction, we secured a settlement that kept the competitor's accused valve out of market. Curtiss-Wright v. Velan, No. 04-CV-1157 (W.D. Tex.).
- Represented defendant Kodak in two related patent infringement actions involving a process for virtual proofing of digital print jobs. We secured a favorable settlement after claim construction. Colorquick v. Kodak, Nos. 6:08-CV-165, 6:06-CV-390 (E.D. Tex.).
- Represented specialty tobacco company Star Scientific in a decade-long legal battle against “big tobacco” seeking to enforce patents directed to an improved curing method that substantially prevents the formation of the primary carcinogen in cured tobacco. The case settled favorably after two rounds of trials and appeals. Star Scientific v. R.J. Reynolds, No. MJG-01-CV-1504 (D. Md.).
- Represented defendants BMW and Mercedes in a patent infringement action involving the transmission of advertisements to vehicles using GPS and Internet technologies. We forced a favorable settlement immediately after a Markman hearing. Fernandez Innovative Technologies v. BMW and Mercedes et al., No. 07-CV-1397 (N.D. Ill.).