John M. Halan has been practicing with the intellectual property law firm of Brooks Kushman P.C. since 1990, where he has been a shareholder for many years and is the head of the firm’s trade secrets group.

As a litigator, he specializes in high-stakes intellectual property litigation, including patent, trade secret, and related commercial litigation.  He has tried many cases as lead or team trial counsel and has also successfully argued cases before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

In addition to litigation, John has negotiated and prepared numerous intellectual property and commercial agreements, including patent and technology license agreements.  He has also prepared many infringement and validity patent opinions and has been called upon to act as a patent dispute mediator.

As a licensed professional engineer, prior to attending law school and joining Brooks Kushman, John managed a number of industrial construction projects from initial design through to completion.

Representative Litigation Matters

Cheetah Omni LLC v. Verizon Services Corporation, et al. (E.D. Tex.) 
Cheetah Omni asserted patent infringement against Verizon regarding certain fiber optic switching technology. Cheetah Omni, represented by John during litigation and at trial, won a $5.4 million jury verdict.

Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. HoMedics, Inc. (W.D. Wis.) 
Sunbeam alleged that HoMedics infringed a Sunbeam patent relating to bathroom scales.  In representing HoMedics, John successfully moved and argued for summary judgment of non-infringement.  John was also successful in having that decision affirmed after Sunbeam appealed to the Federal Circuit.

Bravo Sports, Inc. v. North Pole (US) LLC. et al. (C.D. Cal.) 
Bravo alleged NorthPole was infringing a Bravo patent relating to collapsible canopies.  As lead counsel for NorthPole, John moved for summary judgment of non-infringement and the case was ultimately dismissed.

Syncorp v. Lear Corp. (American Arbitration Association) 
Syncorp alleged Lear  misappropriated trade secrets and breached a supply agreement relating to blow molded cargo covers and sought over $40 million in damages.  Lear, represented by John, counterclaimed for breach of contract.  The arbitration panel found for Lear.

Lear Corp. v. Bertrand Faure Technical Center, Inc. (E.D. Mich) 
Lear sued Bertrand Faure for infringement of a patent directed to self-aligning head rest technology.  The trial court granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Bertrand Faure.  Lear, represented by John, appealed to the Federal Circuit and obtained a reversal.  The case subsequently settled.

Expeditors International v. Vastera, Inc. (E.D. Mich.) 
In a case watched closely by the customs industry (See Customs Brokerage Industry Narrowly Escapes Restructuring, Intellectual Property Litigation Reporter,, October 4, 2004), Expeditors alleged Vastera had misappropriated over 325 trade secrets relating to the customs brokerage industry and sought $150 million in  damages.  John represented Vastera.  The jury found for Vastera and the Court ordered Expeditors to pay over $ 400 thousand in fees to Vastera.

Wiand v. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. (3M) (E.D. Mich.)
John represented Wiand in suing 3M for infringement of a patent relating to abrasive pads.  After establishing liability and damages through aggressive discovery, the matter was resolved on terms that are confidential.

TracTec, Ltd. v. Lear Corp. (6^th Cir. Mich)
TracTec alleged that Lear had misappropriated trade secrets and breached a confidentiality agreement relating to racing car seat technology.  John represented Lear.  After aggressively litigating the case over several months, TracTec agreed to a voluntary dismissal.

Bombardier, Inc. v. Venture Industries Corp. (E.D. Mich.) 
Bombardier sued Venture, alleging claim and delivery for certain mold tooling.  Venture, represented by John, countersued, asserting misappropriation of trade secrets relating to the molding of snowmobile components in thermoplastic olefin (TPO), breach of confidentiality agreements, various liens, unjust enrichment and  fraud.  Bombardier eventually settled and paid damages sought by Venture.

Smith v. Johnson Propeller Co., Inc. (E.D. Mich.) 
Smith alleged infringement of a patent relating to boat propeller blades.  In representing Johnson Propeller, John successfully moved for summary judgment based on patent invalidity, a decision later affirmed by the Federal Circuit after oral argument.

Accurate Detailing v. Haven Busch Co. (17^th Cir. Mich.) 
John represented Accurate Detailing in a bench trial seeking damages from Haven Busch for construction extras.  The claims were based on breach of contract and unjust enrichment.  The Judge found for Accurate Detailing and awarded all damages requested.

Honors & Awards

“Top Lawyer,” DBusiness Magazine, 2012.

Publications

Book Chapter Author, “Drafting a License Agreement with an Eye to the Future,” Insides the Minds:  Intellectual Property Licensing Strategies, February 2011.

Author, “Egyptian Goddess: Filing Down the Design Patent Infringement Test to Ensure a Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words,” IPLS Proceedings, Volume 20, Issue 1, February 24, 2009.

Author, “Patent Law Under Siege: What Does it Mean?” Michigan Business Review, August 28, 2008.

Author, “Don't Let Others Trade Your Secrets,” Security Management Magazine, March 10, 2006.

Quoted, “IP Firms Mull More Aggressive Marketing,” IP Law Bulletin, January 26, 2005.

Author, “Protecting Trade Secrets: Steps Every Employer Should Know,” HR Advisor, January 1, 2005.

Author, “Protecting Trade Secrets: Steps Every Trade Secret Owner Should Know,” Employee Relations Law Journal, December 31, 2004.

Author, “Federal Circuit Overrules Longstanding ‘Adverse Inference’ Rule,” Detroit Legal News, October 12, 2004.

Author, “Settlement Negotiators Beware:  Verbal Negotiations May Have Unintended Consequences,” Corporate Counselor, May 1, 2003.

Speaking Engagements

Guest lecturer, “Intellectual Property,” Lawrence Technological University, 1994 - Present.

Speaker, “Intellectual Property Rights for the Professional Engineer,” Michigan Professional Engineers Seminar, July 20, 2006.