Joshua A. Hartman

Joshua A. Hartman

Associate

Washington D.C., (202) 887-8775

Education

University of Miami (BM, 2000)
University of Miami (MM, 2002)
London School of Economics (LL.M., 2008)
Columbia Law School (J.D., 2009)

Bar Admissions

Virginia
District of Columbia

Joshua Hartman is an associate in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group and Antitrust Law Group. Mr. Hartman focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation in U.S. district courts and before the U.S. International Trade Commission. Mr. Hartman also represents clients in a wide variety of commercial disputes, including in cases involving antitrust, false advertising, breach of contract, and business tort claims.

Mr. Hartman has represented clients in the semiconductor, consumer electronics, medical device, navigation, financial services, transportation, automotive, and construction and development industries, as well as in fields of technology such as cybersecurity, enterprise mobility management, digital rights management, integrated circuit design and power management, human-computer interaction, traffic management, heat transfer, and industrial design. He has drafted numerous Markman briefs and dispositive motions, taken and defended fact and expert depositions, argued Markman, Daubert, dispositive, and non-dispositive motions, and presented technology tutorials.

In 2012, Mr. Hartman received the Distinguished Legal Writing Award from The Burton Awards for Legal Achievement. He was named a “Rising Star” in intellectual property litigation by Super Lawyers, Washington, D.C., 2014–2017.

Mr. Hartman is an active member of the International Trade Committee Trial Lawyers Association, for which he serves on the executive committee and as chair of the editorial committee for the Paul J. Luckern Summer Associate Edition of the 337 Reporter.

Mr. Hartman received his J.D. from Columbia Law School in 2009 and his LL.M. in intellectual property law from the London School of Economics and Political Science in 2008, graduating with distinction. During law school, Mr. Hartman interned with the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts as well as with an intellectual property boutique law firm, where he worked on patent, trademark, and copyright litigation, including litigation under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Mr. Hartman holds M.M. and B.M. degrees from the University of Miami.

Smartphone Litigation
Member of team that successfully tried a high-profile smartphone case leading to a jury verdict of over $1 billion.
PhishMe, Inc. v. Wombat Security Technologies, Inc.
(District of Delaware). Representing PhishMe in patent litigation relating to network security technology against its direct competitor.
Nucap Industries, et al. v. Robert Bosch LLC, et al.
(Northern District of Illinois). Representing Nucap in litigation involving claims for trade secret misappropriation, copyright infringement, and attempted monopolization related to the automotive aftermarket industry.
SRRN Games, LLC v. Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc.
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented Konami in breach of contract action. Settled on favorable terms following order dismissing complaint.
Certain Electric Skincare Devices, Brushes and Charges Therefor, and Kits Containing Same
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-959). Represented Home Skinovations respondents in ITC investigation. Case settled on favorable terms.
In re Delta/AirTran Baggage Fee Antitrust Litigation
(Northern District of Georgia). Representing AirTran Airways in class action antitrust litigation concerning allegations of conspiracy to set airline baggage fees. Obtained summary judgment against plaintiffs’ price-fixing claim and dismissal of plaintiffs’ attempted monopoly claim.
Good Technology Corp. v. AirWatch, LLC
(Northern District of California). Represented AirWatch in patent infringement action concerning enterprise mobility management technology. Case settled on favorable terms.
MediaTek Inc. v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
(Northern District of California). Represented Freescale in patent infringement suit involving patents related to bus architecture, bus arbitration, and power management in integrated circuits. Successfully secured summary judgment and judgments as a matter of law of non-infringement on several claims prior to global settlement of related actions.
Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets and Products Containing Same
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-855). Represented complainant Hitachi Metals and its U.S. affiliate in an ITC investigation resolved by favorable consent orders and settlements prior to hearing.
MAKO Surgical Corp. v. Stanmore Implants Worldwide
(District of Massachusetts; Northern District of California; International Trade Commission). Represented MAKO Surgical in patent litigation in district court and at the ITC relating to surgical guidance systems. Settled on favorable terms.
Triangle Software LLC v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., et al.
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented TomTom in patent infringement action involving traffic management technology. Case settled on favorable terms.
Walker Digital LLC v. Capital One
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented Capital One in patent infringement action involving online credit card application systems. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement shortly after discovery commenced.
Smartphone Litigation
Member of team that successfully tried a high-profile smartphone case leading to a jury verdict of over $1 billion.
PhishMe, Inc. v. Wombat Security Technologies, Inc.
(District of Delaware). Representing PhishMe in patent litigation relating to network security technology against its direct competitor.
Nucap Industries, et al. v. Robert Bosch LLC, et al.
(Northern District of Illinois). Representing Nucap in litigation involving claims for trade secret misappropriation, copyright infringement, and attempted monopolization related to the automotive aftermarket industry.
SRRN Games, LLC v. Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc.
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented Konami in breach of contract action. Settled on favorable terms following order dismissing complaint.
Certain Electric Skincare Devices, Brushes and Charges Therefor, and Kits Containing Same
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-959). Represented Home Skinovations respondents in ITC investigation. Case settled on favorable terms.
In re Delta/AirTran Baggage Fee Antitrust Litigation
(Northern District of Georgia). Representing AirTran Airways in class action antitrust litigation concerning allegations of conspiracy to set airline baggage fees. Obtained summary judgment against plaintiffs’ price-fixing claim and dismissal of plaintiffs’ attempted monopoly claim.
Good Technology Corp. v. AirWatch, LLC
(Northern District of California). Represented AirWatch in patent infringement action concerning enterprise mobility management technology. Case settled on favorable terms.
MediaTek Inc. v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
(Northern District of California). Represented Freescale in patent infringement suit involving patents related to bus architecture, bus arbitration, and power management in integrated circuits. Successfully secured summary judgment and judgments as a matter of law of non-infringement on several claims prior to global settlement of related actions.
Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets and Products Containing Same
(International Trade Commission, 337-TA-855). Represented complainant Hitachi Metals and its U.S. affiliate in an ITC investigation resolved by favorable consent orders and settlements prior to hearing.
MAKO Surgical Corp. v. Stanmore Implants Worldwide
(District of Massachusetts; Northern District of California; International Trade Commission). Represented MAKO Surgical in patent litigation in district court and at the ITC relating to surgical guidance systems. Settled on favorable terms.
Triangle Software LLC v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., et al.
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented TomTom in patent infringement action involving traffic management technology. Case settled on favorable terms.
Walker Digital LLC v. Capital One
(Eastern District of Virginia). Represented Capital One in patent infringement action involving online credit card application systems. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement shortly after discovery commenced.

In 2012, Mr. Hartman received the Distinguished Legal Writing Award from The Burton Awards for Legal Achievement. He was named a “Rising Star” in intellectual property litigation by Super Lawyers, Washington, D.C., 2014–2017.

Email Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

©1996-2017 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.