Michael Vella is a Partner in the Litigation Department of Morrison & Foerster LLP. and is the Head of the Litigation Practice in China. Mr. Vella assists clients in the litigation of international business disputes, including cases involving intellectual property, securities, antitrust, products liability and international arbitration. Mr. Vella also counsels clients in the electronics and biotechnology industries in connection with litigation avoidance and adversarial license negotiations. Before relocating to the firm's Shanghai office, Mr. Vella was ranked as one of the top Intellectual Property Litigation Lawyers in Southern California by Super Lawyers.

Mr. Vella has long experience representing clients in international intellectual property disputes, including patent, copyright and trademark litigation. For example, on the defense side, Mr. Vella represented semiconductor manufacturer, Macronix International Co. Ltd. (旺宏電子), in the case of Atmel Corporation v. Macronix America, Inc. (USDC N.D. Cal.), involving the assertion of two patents claiming semiconductor circuits and fabrication processes. Mr. Vella won a bench trial for Macronix invalidating Atmel’s circuit patent and won a summary judgment motion invalidating all but one of the claims of Atmel’s process patent. After these victories, the case settled favorably for Macronix.

As an example of his plaintiff’s work, Mr. Vella represented Nikon Corporation in a high-stakes patent dispute with Dutch manufacturer, ASM Lithography, Inc. (ASML), concerning microlithography technology. Morrison & Foerster took over the case after Nikon had lost a related ITC proceeding against ASML. After persuading the district court to reject the ITC’s construction of Nikon’s patents and instead adopt a more favorable construction, the case settled with a $145 million payment to Nikon.

Mr. Vella is a member of the California Bar. He is admitted to practice in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Third Circuit, and Ninth Circuit. He is also admitted to practice in the United States District Courts for the Northern, Central, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California. Mr. Vella served as a law clerk to the Honorable Roger B. Andewelt of the United States Court of Federal Claims.

Mr. Vella earned his B.A. degree at U.C. Berkeley, as well as his J.D. degree at U.C. Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law. Mr. Vella studied the law of the European Union at the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium.

Mr. Vella’s recent speaking engagements include:

• Session Speaker, "Discovery and Discovery from Experts," 3rd Annual Corporate Intellectual Property Conference 2008, Shenzhen, China, May 8 and 9, 2008.
• Moderator, San Diego Software Industry Council Conference on Managing Innovation, San Diego, California, May 16, 2007.
• Keynote Speaker, “Strategic Use of Reexamination Proceedings,” Asia Pacific Intellectual Property Association Conference on Advanced Patent Litigation Strategies, Taipei and Hsinchu, June 1 and 2, 2006.
• Keynote Speaker, “Managing Discovery,” Asia Pacific Intellectual Property Association Conference on Practical Issues in Patent Litigation, Taipei and Hsinchu, February 22 and 23, 2005.

Mr. Vella’s publications include:

• Michael W. Vella and Michael Carlson, “What You Need to Know About Managing a Patent Mega-Case,” The Law Journal Newsletter's The Corporate Counselor, October 2005 (Volume 20, Number 5).
• Michael W. Vella, Beth Brinkmann, and Janet Xiao, “Behind the Footnote in Merck KGaA v Integra,” Pharmaceutical Law Insight, October 2005 (Volume 1, Number 4).
• Michael W. Vella, “Which Way Europe? The Controversy Over Computer- Implemented Inventions,” EuroWatch, June 15, 2005 (Volume 17, Number 11).
• Michael W. Vella, “Open Source Software: Assessing The IP Risks,” IP Law Bulletin, May 2005.

Mr. Vella’s representative matters include:

• Altera v. Lattice Semiconductor (N.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented Altera Corporation in this patent case relating to programmable logic devices. Following claim construction briefing, the case settled favorably for Altera.
• Anvik v. Nikon Corporation (S.D.N.Y.): Mr. Vella represents Nikon in this patent infringement litigation involving cross-assertion of patents relating to laser technology and large-field microlithography.
• Atmel Corporation v. Macronix America, Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturer, Macronix, in this patent case involving semiconductor circuit and process patents. After winning a summary judgment motion and a bench trial on inventorship, we obtained a favorable settlement for Macronix.
• Computing Technology Industry Association, Inc. v. New Vision Technologies (S.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella obtained a preliminary injunction for COMPTIA in this trade secret case, resulting in favorable settlement with a permanent injunction.
• Code Alarm, Inc. v. Directed Electronics, Inc. (“DEI”) (S.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented Directed Electronics Inc. in this patent case involving automobile alarm technology. Mr. Vella’s team won the trial with a jury verdict of invalidity and non-infringement for DEI.
• Dicam v. Kyocera Wireless Corp. (N.D. Ill.): Mr. Vella represented Kyocera Wireless Corp. in a patent infringement case alleging infringement against Kyocera camera phones. Mr. Vella filed a motion for summary judgment of non-infringement early in the case and achieved an early settlement.
• Flashpoint Technology, Inc. v. Kyocera Wireless Corp. (D. Del.) Mr. Vella represents Kyocera Wireless Corporation in this patent infringement case relating to digital imaging technology..
• Inverness Medical Switzerland and Unipath Diagnostics v. ACON Laboratories (D. Mass.): Mr. Vella represented ACON in two patent suits brought by Inverness alleging that ACON’s test kits infringe a total of nine patents. The case settled on terms favorable to ACON.
• Merck KGAA v. Integra LifeSciences Amicus Representation (U.S. Supreme Court): Mr. Vella represented a group of biotechnology tool companies and trade associations in submitting an important amicus brief in this case involving the FDA exemption to patent infringement. The Supreme Court’s ruling expressly avoided any decision that could undermine the patent rights of biotechnology tool companies.
• Nikon Corporation v. ASML Netherlands, BV (N.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented Nikon in this patent case in which we obtained a $145 million settlement for our client after taking over a case which Nikon had previously lost in the International Trade Commission.
• Nintendo America Global Anti-Piracy Program (Worldwide): Mr. Vella worked on the team that coordinated and executed Nintendo America’s global anti-piracy program, including monitoring piracy and counterfeiting and related legal developments in foreign countries, coordinating enforcement actions, preparing Special 301 Comments to the U.S. Trade Representative, and negotiating with government officials in the U.S. and abroad.
• Orbsak v. EchoStar/Thomson/Mitsubishi (E.D. Tex.): Mr. Vella obtained a favorable settlement for our joint clients, EchoStar, Thomson and Mitsubishi in a case alleging infringement of a patent relating to transmission of digital television signals.
• QMed v. LifeMasters Supported SelfCare (D. N.J.): Mr. Vella represented LifeMasters in this patent case involving a disease management patent. After pursuing an arbitration strategy, the case settled favorably for LifeMasters without a single deposition or any significant disturbance of LifeMaster’s business.
• Ronald A. Katz Technology L.P. vs. American Electric Power, et al. (E.D. Tex.): Mr. Vella represented Target in a patent case alleging infringement of a large portfolio of interactive telephone/computer interface patents. Mr. Vella spearheaded the joint defense effort to obtain an order from the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation consolidating the case with over twenty other actions and transferring it from the Eastern District of Texas to the Central District of California. Thereafter, the case settled favorably for Target.
• In re Katz Technology Licensing Patent Litigation (C.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented four defendants in multidistrict patent litigation involving a large portfolio of interactive telephone/computer interface patents. Mr. Vella successfully settled the cases for his clients without the need for expensive and burdensome discovery.
• St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants v. Kyocera Wireless Corp. (D. Del.): Mr. Vella represents Kyocera Wireless Corporation in this patent infringement case relating to storing and formatting of digital image signals.
• Stratagene v. Invitrogen Corporation (D. Md.): Mr. Vella represented Invitrogen in a patent infringement case involving polymerase blends for enhanced polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The case settled favorably after Mr. Vella defeated plaintiff’s summary judgment motion and successfully petitioned the Patent and Trademark Office to reexamine the patent.
• SIBIA Neurosciences, Inc. v. Cadus Pharmaceutical Corporation (S.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella represented Cadus in this patent case relating to cell-based assays. Mr. Vella took the case through trial and assisted the appellate team in obtaining judgment of patent invalidity in favor of Cadus.
• TiVo v. EchoStar (E.D. Tex.): Mr. Vella represented EchoStar in the defense of this patent infringement case involving digital video recorder technology.
• United States Olympic Committee v. Does (Various U.S. District Courts): Mr. Vella worked on the team that coordinated and executed the USOC’s anti-counterfeiting program, including litigating counterfeiting actions, and obtaining and executing ex parte seizure orders.
• World Cup USA v. Does (Various U.S. District Courts): Mr. Vella obtained and executed Facility Venue Seizure Orders for trademark counterfeiting at World Cup soccer events.
• X-Concepts v. Somerville (S.D. Cal.): Mr. Vella obtained a preliminary injunction in this trademark and copyright case for X-Concepts, resulting in favorable settlement.