Christian Andreu-von Euw focuses his practice on intellectual property disputes and commercial litigation, with an emphasis on patent and trade secrets litigation. He represents electronics, biotechnology, and software companies in disputes involving patents, trade secrets, business interference, and other matters in state and federal courts and before the International Trade Commission.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw has experience with bench and jury trials and has tried over half a dozen cases to verdict. He has also avoided the need for other trials by representing clients in successful settlement negotiations and mediations. His pre-trial experience covers the entire pre-trial process and includes all aspects of written discovery, frequent depositions, and experience representing clients in discovery hearings, evidentiary hearings, summary judgment hearings, pre-trial motions, and other hearings.
Before becoming an attorney, Mr. Andreu-von Euw worked as an electrical engineer in both the United States and Germany. He designed products in the telecommunications and broadcast video industries and was awarded U.S. Patent No. 7,120,363 for his work in free space optical communications. His technical experience spans a range of technologies that include software design, digital video, electro-optics, optical sensors, programmable logic, controllers for mechanical and optical systems, and analog and digital circuit card design. Accordingly, he works with technical experts on a regular basis, helping them prepare reports and preparing them for deposition and trial.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw also has extensive e-discovery expertise. He has overseen review projects involving millions of documents, including a number of cases in which he used predictive coding and other technology-assisted review tools to lower the costs and increase the efficacy of large-scale document review.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw dedicates almost ten percent of his time to pro bono matters and has represented pro bono clients in litigation across a broad range of legal disciplines including immigration, housing, criminal defense, and domestic violence. His pro bono work has been recognized by Casa Cornelia, which honored him with its La Mancha Award for pro bono service in 2013, and by Morrison & Foerster, which recognized him with the 2017 Kathi Pugh Award for Pro Bono Service.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw is a member of the San Diego IP Lawyers Association and the Wallace Inn of Court. He serves as the chair of the board of advisors for the Crawford Academy of Law. He was also selected as a 2017 and 2018 “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw earned a B.S. in electrical engineering from Harvey Mudd College in 1999, and a J.D. from the University of Southern California in 2009. He served as an extern to the Honorable Laurence Rubin, Associate Justice of the California Court of Appeals, and the Honorable Stephen Hillman, Chief Magistrate Judge of U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Mr. Andreu-von Euw is fluent in Spanish and conversant in German.
Meridian BioScience, Inc. v. DiaSorin, Inc.(Southern District of Ohio). Represent Meridian BioScience in trade secret/breach of contract dispute relating to diagnostic tests for the presence of Helicobacter pylori stool antigen and other stool antigens.
Enrata Inc. v. Yardi Systems Inc.(District of Utah). Represent Entrata Inc., a provider of property management software, in an antitrust dispute.
DexCom Inc. v. Glucovation Inc.(San Diego Superior Court). Represent DexCom Inc. in trade secret dispute against former employees.
Orlando Communications LLC v. Kyocera Communications Inc. (Middle District of Florida). Represented Kyocera Communications Inc. in patent infringement dispute related to range and bearing tracking systems and adaptive error correction. Plaintiff dismissed case after Kyocera obtained a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss.
Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof (International Trade Commission, 337-TA-853). Represented Kyocera Communications Inc. and Kyocera Corporation in a two-week evidentiary hearing before the ITC in a patent infringement dispute involving microprocessor clocking technology. Case settled on favorable terms shortly after trial.
Frequency Systems LLC v. Kyocera Communications Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Kyocera Communications Inc. in patent infringement suit involving 802.11 and LTE technologies. Investigated claims and engaged in negotiations with plaintiff that led to an unconditional dismissal of Kyocera.
Vantage Point LLC v. Kyocera Communications Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Kyocera Communications Inc. in patent infringement dispute related to microprocessor pipelining technology. Case settled on favorable terms after successful motion to transfer case to the Northern District of California.
Yardi Systems Inc. v. Property Solutions International Inc. (Central District of California). Represent Entrata Inc. (f/k/a Property Solutions International Inc.) in a copyright/trade secret dispute involving property management software.
Wyncomm LLC v. Kyocera Communications Inc. (District of Delaware). Represented Kyocera Communications Inc. in patent infringement dispute related to 802.11 technologies. Case settled on favorable terms.
Certain Electronic Imaging Devices. (International Trade Commission, 337-TA-850). Helped develop non-infringement defenses that led to ruling by Administrative Law Judge that there was no Section 337 violation by Huawei in relation to the lawsuit brought concerning Android mobile phones by Flashpoint Technology.
Ventria Bioscience v. Yang (Sacramento Superior Court). Represented inventor in trade secret dispute involving genetically modified grain seeds. Case settled on favorable terms shortly before trial.
Eastman Kodak v. Kyocera Corp. (Western District of New York). Represented Kyocera Corporation in a patent/licensing dispute involving the Kodak digital imaging patent portfolio and Kyocera’s patent portfolio. Case terminated with a favorable settlement resolving all outstanding litigation against Kodak.
Dicam, Inc. v. Palm, Inc. (Western District of Virginia). Represented Palm Inc. in patent infringement dispute involving devices for remote image capture. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement at the outset of the case via a pre-discovery motion for claim construction and summary judgment.
©1996-2018 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.