top of page

Enforcement Litigation

AdobeStock_217802647_Preview_edited.jpg

When your intellectual property is threatened, your business is at risk. At Handal & Morofsky, we help innovators, creators, and companies enforce their rights and defend against unjust claims across the full spectrum of intellectual property disputes.

From courtroom battles to strategic settlements, we bring deep legal expertise and business-minded solutions to protect what makes your brand, product, or idea unique.

​

Unlike almost all law firms specializing in intellectual property, Handal & Morofsky has a robust litigation and enforcement of intellectual property law practice. We litigate matters to trial before the federal courts, and the patent and trademark trial boards of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. H&M appellate practice of successfully prosecuted appeals before the federal circuit courts, and has been involved on several occasions in appellate practice before the United States Supreme Court. Our team of experienced attorneys is dedicated to helping clients protect their intellectual property rights.

​

We represent plaintiffs and defendants in all types of intellectual property disputes, including:

  • Patent Enforcement and Infringement

  • Trademark Infringement & Brand Misuse

  • Copyright Violation

  • Trade Secret Theft & Breach of Confidentiality

Whether you’re a startup defending your innovation or a global company protecting a trademark portfolio, our team delivers tailored litigation strategies focused on your business goals.

REPRESENTATIVE ENGAGEMENTS AS LEAD COUNSEL

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

  • Star Athletica, LLC. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., et al. (2017); Chosun v. Chrisha (2005): Successfully represented amicus curiae Chosun International in convincing the Supreme Court to restore the law upholding copyrightability of clothing as laid out by the Second Circuit.

  • Nicassio v. Viacom International Inc., and Penguin Random House, LLC (US, 19-560): Lead counsel in petition for certiorari seeking resolution of conflicting copyright decisions in the federal appellate courts relating to application of the scènes-à-faire doctrine.  

  • Jovanni Fashion, Limited v. Fiesta Fashions, et al. (US, 12-836): Lead counsel in team including former registrar of copyrights in case seeking to recognize copyrightability of clothing.

  • Capital Bridge Co., Ltd. v. IVL Technologies Ltd., 552 US 1142 (2008): Represented patent holder in petition seeking review of decision on patent relating to wireless karaoke devices.

PATENT LITIGATION

  • GHS v. Selner (PTAB, 2024)Successfully represented doctor who developed biocidal wound preparation against drug company claiming doctor derived the invention from drug company researcher.

  • Floriey v. Life Pro Fitness LLC, and Bed, Bath & Beyond, Inc. (EDNY, 2022): Enforced patents dealing with adjustable barbells.

  • QFO Labs, Inc. v. Best Buy Stores, LP (D. Minn., 2021): Successfully defended retailer and drone manufacturer against charges of patent infringement.

  • QFO Labs, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc. (D. Minn., 2022): Successfully defended online marketplace operator and drone manufacturer against charges of patent infringement.

  • Johnson Controls Technology Company v. BuildingIQ, Inc. (D. Del, 2021): Successfully defended smart building HVAC technology company against patent owner.

  • Multiwave Sensors, Inc. v. Sunsight Holdings, LLC (M.D. Fla., 2017): Successfully enforced patent relating to cell tower antenna installations.

  • Hsueh v. Harbor Freight (D CT, 2014): Enforced mechanical tool patent against major retailer.

  • Tour Technology Systems, LLC v. VFM Leonardo, Inc. (EDNY, 2015): Enforcement of industry dominating virtual tour technology patent against largest hotel rich content provider.

  • Conair v. Miele & Cie. Kg (SDNY, 2013): Enforced cappuccino machine patent against major European appliance manufacturer.

  • Tour Technology Systems, LLC v. Ice Portal (EDNY, 2014): Enforcement of virtual tour technology patent against major rich content provider.

  • Honeywell International, Inc. v. Venstar (D. Minn, 2011): Represented largest private label thermostat manufacturer against claims under numerous patents, structuring a resolution which led to subsequent acquisition of the company by major international smart building technology company.

  • Sears Petroleum v Archer Daniels Midland (NDNY 2003): Represnted major agricultural conglomerate against charge of patent infringement dealing with con-based deicing technology.

  • Conair Corporation v. Eurasia Concepts, Inc. (DC Conn, 2004): Obtained injunction enforcing pioneering hair straightener patent involving rearrangement of disulfide bonds in human hair keratin using an equilibrium reaction.

  • Chorus Corporation v. Riber S.A. (DC NJ, 2000): Successfully defended patent infringement claim on behalf of manufacturer of ultrahigh vacuum semiconductor fabrication equipment.

  • Seche v. Tevco (DC CD Cal, 1995): Defended SNPE subsidiary against alleged infringement of patent on quick drying nail enamels, obtaining for client royalty free license and major purchase by patent holder of product from defendant client.

  • Hoechst v. Foster-Miller (PTO Bd Int, 1995): Represented junior party respecting inventorship of process for manufacture of high strength liquid crystal polymer materials.

  • William Wrigley, Jr. Co. v. Waters, (DC SNY) 5 USPQ2d 1741 (Dec. 16, 1987); affd. 890 F.2d 594, 13 USPQ 2d 1125 (2nd Cir., 1989): Enforced obligations against patent agent in successful nine-week bench trial.

  • JVC v. RCA (DC SNY, 1983): Represented JVC in contest respecting inventorship of videodisc resulting in termination of RCA videodisc business.

  • Instruments SA v. American Holographic, Inc. (DC Del, 1979): Enforced pioneer holographic optical element patents against infringer.

TRADEMARK AND TRADE DRESS LITIGATION

  • Baby’s Coffee v. Hess et al (DC La, 2023)Obtained injunction enforcing trademark rights in the name of coffee bar in Key West against an infringer in New Orleans Louisiana.

  • Stay You, LLC v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz LP (DC SNY, 2023): Enforced trademark rights in spoken slogan of podcast against national clothing retailer.

  • Dwarven Forge v. The Design Mechanism (DC Conn, and TTAB, 2017): Stopped infringement of trademark rights in fictional place name employed in client’s gaming products against fantasy game publisher.

  • Algood Casters v. Caster Concepts (DC SNY, 2020): Obtained injunction enforcing the trademark MAXX.

  • AJB v. Backjoy Orthotics (DC Conn, 2016): Obtained injunction preventing defendant from continuing to manufacture pressure point device infringing trade dress rights of plaintiff.

  • Betches, LLC v. AwsomenessTV, Inc. (DC ENY, 2016): Enjoined use of client’s webzine name for comedy show against T-Mobile subsidiary.

  • Dayco Products, LLC v. Dorman Products, Inc (E.D. Mich., 2009): Successful enforcement of trade dress rights in the shape of automatic belt tensioners.

  • ProFitness Physical Therapy Center v. Pro-Fit Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy P.C., 314 F. 3d 62, 65 USPQ2d 1195 (2nd Cir., 2004): Obtained for client an order enjoining trademark infringement after a decision introducing the legal theory of progressive encroachment to Second Circuit law.

  • Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. v. Philippe Charriol International, Ltd., 56 USPQ2d 1975 (DC SNY, 2000): Obtained summary judgment decision for plaintiff in a declaratory judgment defense of a plaintiff-retailer in a jewelry design trade dress case.

  • Hermes International v. Lederer de Paris Fifth Avenue, Inc., 50 F.Supp.2d 212, 50 USPQ2d 1257 (DC SNY, 1999): Defended retailers against alleged infringement of trade dress in handbags, obtaining favorable decision on summary judgment.

  • Times Newspapers, Ltd. v. Times Pub. Co., 1993 WL 120614, 25 USPQ2d 1835, 21 Media L. Rep. 1065 (MD Fla., 1993): Successfully asserted London paper’s “The Times” trademark against newspaper in Tampa.

  • Score, Inc. v. Cap Cities/ABC, Inc., 724 F. Supp. 194, 13 USPQ 2d 1230 (DC SNY, 1989): Successfully asserted trade dress rights in television program.

  • BLI v. Heritage Quilts (DC SNY, 1978): Successfully asserted trade dress rights in clothing in ground-breaking fashion industry case.

COPYRIGHT LITIGATION

  • MerchDirect LLC v. Cloud Warmer, Inc. (DC ENY, 2017)Successful defense of copyright action relating to software for e-commerce platform.

  • Chosun International, Inc v. Chrisha Creations, Ltd. (2nd Cir., 2005): Asserted copyright for costumes and succeeded in obtaining decision recognizing clothing as subject matter which may be protected by copyright law, overruling a longstanding tenet of the copyright law.

  • Celebration International, Inc. v. Chosun International, Inc., 234 F.Supp.2d 905, 2003 Copr.L.Dec. P 28, 562, 65 USPQ 2d 1504 (SD Ind., 2002): Defended copyright infringement claim respecting Halloween costumes.

​PUBLICATIONS

  • Intellectual Property Today, February 2009“Does the Power of the Internet Justify Changing Traditional Rules for Trademark Infringement?".

  • Thompson Hine LLP Bulletin, September 2008:  “Intellectual Property Update: Inter Partes Reexamination Becoming Efficient and Effective in Removing Weak Blocking Patents”.

  • Intellectual Property Today, October 2005: “Second and Fifth Circuits Clash on Copyright Protection for Costumes and Clothing”.

Speaking with the Judge

Protecting Your Innovation Through Strategic IP Litigation

Handal & Morofsky stands at the forefront of intellectual property litigation, delivering aggressive advocacy and sophisticated legal strategies to safeguard your most valuable assets. Our specialized practice focuses exclusively on the complex intersection of IP law and high-stakes litigation.

Uncompromising IP Defense & Enforcement

When your patents, trademarks, copyrights, or trade secrets face infringement or challenge, precision matters. Our battle-tested attorneys combine deep technical expertise with courtroom excellence to deliver results that protect your competitive advantage and bottom line.

Our Core IP Litigation Services

Patent Litigation & Strategy

  • Complex patent infringement disputes

  • Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings

  • Patent validity challenges and defense

  • Licensing negotiation and enforcement

Trademark & Brand Protection

  • Federal and state trademark litigation

  • Domain name disputes and cybersquatting

  • Counterfeiting and brand enforcement

  • Opposition and cancellation proceedings

Trade Secret & Confidential Information

  • Misappropriation claims and defense

  • Employee mobility and non-compete matters

  • Emergency injunctive relief

  • Corporate espionage investigations

Copyright & Digital Media

  • Software piracy and DMCA enforcement

  • Entertainment and media litigation

  • Fair use and transformative work disputes

  • Digital content protection strategies

Why Industry Leaders Choose Handal & Morofsky

Proven Track Record: Our attorneys have secured multi-million dollar victories and favorable settlements across diverse industries, from Fortune 500 corporations to innovative startups.

Technical Depth: We don't just understand the law—we understand your technology. Our team includes attorneys with advanced degrees in engineering, computer science, and other technical disciplines.

Strategic Thinking: Every case begins with comprehensive business analysis. We align legal strategy with your commercial objectives, whether that means aggressive enforcement, defensive positioning, or strategic settlement.

Efficient Execution: IP litigation demands speed and precision. Our streamlined processes and cutting-edge legal technology ensure responsive service without compromising thoroughness.

Industries We Serve

  • Technology & Software

  • Pharmaceuticals & Life Sciences

  • Manufacturing & Industrial Design

  • Consumer Products & Retail

  • Entertainment & Media

  • Financial Services & Fintech

Ready to Protect Your IP Rights?

Don't let intellectual property theft or infringement threaten your business. Contact Handal & Morofsky today for a confidential consultation about your IP litigation needs.

Schedule Your Strategic Consultation

image_edited_edited.jpg

Handal & Morofsky LLC

​

Connecticut Office

83 East Avenue

Suite 308
Norwalk, CT 06851

​

New York Office

420 Lexington Avenue

New York, NY 10170

©2024  Handal & Morofsky LLC.

bottom of page