Brian Busey is a Senior Counsel in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. Mr. Busey’s practice focuses on complex intellectual property matters—particularly those before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). Mr. Busey has litigated more than forty section 337 cases before the ITC and has served as the president of the ITC’s Trial Lawyers Association.
In addition to his active ITC practice, Mr. Busey has handled cross-border patent, trademark, and trade secret disputes in federal district court and before alternative dispute resolution tribunals. Mr. Busey also has counseled clients concerning intellectual property licensing issues and represented airports and airport proprietors in major administrative and court litigation.
Mr. Busey is a frequent speaker and author, both in the U.S. and in Asia, on ITC practice and procedure. Mr. Busey has been recognized as a leader in the ITC and intellectual property litigation practice by Chambers USA (2013-2017), Chambers Global (2014–2017), Legal 500 US (2011-2018), Best Lawyers in America (2010–2021), and IAM Patent 1000 (2014–2016). He was recognized as the top lawyer in Washington, D.C. for intellectual property by the Washington Business Journal (2009). For his work in ITC and intellectual property litigation, Mr. Busey is an inaugural inductee into the Legal 500 2017 Hall of Fame, along with fewer than 500 other outstanding U.S. partners who have been recommended as “Leading Lawyers” for the last six years consecutively.
Mr. Busey holds a B.A. and M.A. from Georgetown University and a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center. While earning his law degree, Mr. Busey was an editor of the Georgetown Law Journal. He was a law clerk to Judge John H. Pratt of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.Show More
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-984). Representing Honda and Fujitsu Ten Respondents in patent-based ITC investigation. ITC case and parallel court actions settled on favorable terms.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-994). Represented respondent BlackBerry in an ITC investigation involving a hierarchical user interface for accessing music tracks on portable media players. Obtained an early initial determination from the ALJ finding the asserted patent invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-959). Represented Home Skinovations Respondents in patent-based ITC investigation. Case terminated based on favorable settlement.
(International Trade Commission, 337–TA–918). Represented International Laser Group against patent infringement claims brought by complainant Canon. The case settled on favorable terms, pursuant to which ILG may continue to sell its remanufactured toner cartridges in the U.S.
(Southern District of New York). Represented Chinese and U.S. affiliate manufacturers of toner cartridges; settled on favorable terms.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-855). Represented complainants Hitachi Metals and its U.S. affiliate in an ITC investigation that was resolved by settlements and consent orders favorable to complainants prior to hearing.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-853). Represented respondent Kyocera in patent based investigation. Case settled on favorable basis for respondent following trial.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-850). Represented respondent Huawei Technologies in patent infringement case involving mobile imaging technology used in handsets, tablets and other mobile devices. Case resolved following trial with favorable ruling by ITC.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-841). Represented respondent Fujitsu Limited in a patent infringement case involving flash memory card readers used in computers and other electronic devices. Case resolved for client by favorable settlement before trial.
(Western District of Wisconsin). Represented Toshiba Corporation in a patent infringement action against several foreign manufacturers and U.S. distributors of recordable and rewritable DVDs. Case settled on favorable terms.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-708). Represented Japan-based Hoshino and its U.S. affiliate in patent infringement actions relating to guitars and other musical instruments.
(Middle District of Florida). Represented Toshiba Mitsubishi Electric Industrial Corporation Ltd. of Japan and its U.S. affiliate in a patent infringement suit relating to industrial drives and wind turbines. Case settled on favorable terms after mediation.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-699, 634, 631). Represented Sharp in patent infringement based ITC investigations involving technology to improve viewing angle and response time for LCD panels used in LCD TVs and monitors. Case settled on favorable terms.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-603). Obtained an exclusion order preventing two defaulting respondents from importing infringing DVD products as well as a consent order preventing another respondent from importing or selling infringing DVD players and recorders on behalf of complainants Toshiba Corporation and Toshiba America Consumer Products (TACP) in a patent-based investigation in the International Trade Commission against 17 distributors and importers from China, Hong Kong and the U.S. of DVD players and recorders. These orders were obtained on the heels of negotiated settlements with more than a dozen other respondents, who agreed to take licenses for future sales of their DVD products and pay substantial past royalties for DVD product sales. A parallel district court action in the Northern District of California was voluntarily dismissed in 2009.
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented Kokoku Intech Co. Ltd., a Japanese co-defendant in a patent infringement case involving mouse tips used in IBM/Lenovo ThinkPad laptop computers. Settled on favorable terms.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-600). Represented respondent Sanyo Electric Co. Ltd. in patent infringement based investigation. Case settled after winning partial summary determination sharply limiting the products subject to the investigation.
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-568). Represented Ortho Biotech Products, L.P., an affiliate of J&J, in filing to intervene as a co-complainant in a patent infringement complaint brought by Amgen against Roche Holding Ltd. and related entities. Case was terminated subject to potential refiling.