estate planning, wills, personal injury, business law, employment, contracts, bankruptcy, real estate, intellectual property, patents and litigation
Varboncouer Law
Varboncouer Law |  Frankfort: 815-278-2448 | Chicago: 312-343-3503 | Mobile:708-218-4412 | mvarboncouer@varboncouer.com
Attorney at Law - Chicago & Frankfort, Illinois
Estate Planning | Personal Injury  |  Business Law | Contracts | Bankruptcy | Real Estate  | Intellectual Property | Patents | Litigation | Licensing
Mr. Varboncouer has been involved in numerous litigations involving a variety of technologies, including the following: Freight Tracking Technologies, LLC, v. APM Terminal Virginia, Inc. et al., 2:14cv105 (E.D. Va.).  Patent litigation involving GPS tracking technology. MacroPoint, LLC v. Salebug.com, LLC, 1:14cv312 (N.D. Ohio).  Patent and tortious interference litigation involving cell phone tracking software. Hawk Technology Systems, LLC v. Justice Family Group, LLC, 5:14cv25275 (S.D. W.Va.).  Patent litigation relating to video technology. Breckenridge v. Blackberry Ltd et al., 3:13cv4787 (N.D. Tex.).  Patent litigation involving cell phone dialing technology. Solocron Media, LLC v. Sprint Spectrum L.P., et al., 2:13cv1059 (E.D. Tex.).  Patent litigation involving cell phone ring tone and message transcoding technology. Ruyan Investment (Holdings) Limited v. BLEC, LLC, 2:11cv367 (C.D. Cal.). Patent litigation involving technology for electronic cigarettes. Network Signatures Inc. v. Virgin Mobile USA Inc., 8:11cv917 (C.D. Cal.). Patent litigation relating to data encryption technology. Orren Pickell Homes, LLC v. Hussain, and GEA Architects, Ltd., 1:11cv03587 (N.D. Ill.).  Copyright litigation relating to architectural plans. SourceProse, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 1:11cv117 (W.D. Tex.).  Patent litigation relating to mapping technology. Intellectual Ventures I, LLC et al. v. Sprint Spectrum L.P. et al., 12cv193 (Del.).  Patent litigation involving cell phone and messaging technologies. TQP Development, LLC v. 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc. et al., 2:11cv248 (E.D. Tex.).  Patent litigation relating to methods of data encryption. Dynamic Fluid Controls Ltd. v. International Valve Mfg., et al., 1:10cv7555 (N.D. Ill.).  Patent, trade secret, trademark, and trade dress litigation involving vent technology for water lines. G-P Moves Freight, LLC v. J.B. Hunt Transport et al., 5:11cv99 (E.D. Tex.).  Patent litigation relating to the design of storage containers. Mopex, Inc. v. Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., (N.D. Ill.).  Patent litigation involving business methods.  See Mopex, Inc. v. Chicago Stock Exchange Inc., No. 01C302, 2003 WL 715652 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 27, 2003). Caterpillar, Inc. v. Sturman Industries, Inc., (C.D. Ill).  Trade secret, contract, and patent inventorship litigation involving magnetic materials and diesel engine technology.  See Caterpillar, Inc. v. Sturman Industries, Inc., 387 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Bausch & Lomb, Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc., (W.D.N.Y.).  Patent litigation involving ocular health methods. Caterpillar, Inc. v. International Truck and Engine Corp., (S.C.).  Patent litigation involving diesel engine technology.  CCC Information Services, Inc. v. Mitchell International, Inc., (N.D. Ill.).  Patent litigation involving computer systems for repair estimations.    Samsung Telecommunications America LLP v. Ericsson, Inc., (ITC).  ITC action involving encoding/transmitting wireless technologies.   Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. v. RBC Centura Banks, Inc., (E.D. N.C., N.D. Ill., C.D. Ill.).  Multi-district patent litigation involving call center technology.    Textura LLC v. Micheal L. Flynn, (Wis.).  Trade secret misappropriation, breach of fiduciary duty, and tortuous interference litigation. Visto Corp. v. Research In Motion, Ltd., (E.D. Tex.).  Patent infringement litigation involving wireless technology. LG Electronics, Inc. v. Hitachi, Ltd., (E.D. Tex., N.D. Cal.).  Patent involving computer and storage system architecture and technology. 3M Unitek Corporation v. Ormco Company, (C.D. Cal.).  Patent litigation involving orthodontic technology. Exxon Corp. v. Dow Chemical Co., (E.D. Tex).  Patent infringement litigation involving organometallic catalysis technology. DISCLAIMER:  Case results do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case undertaken by a lawyer.  Case results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case.
Experience
estate planning, wills, personal injury, business law, employment, contracts, bankruptcy, real estate, intellectual property, patents and litigation