Wendy Ray is an accomplished trial lawyer with experience in high-stakes intellectual property and complex commercial litigation. She is head of the firm’s Litigation Department in Los Angeles and a member of the firm’s board of directors. Ms. Ray’s long track record of successfully litigating the most complicated and challenging cases has made her a sought-after litigator for some of the world’s top technology, consumer products, and media companies.
Ms. Ray counsels clients in a range of high-technology patent and trade secret matters including autonomous systems, semiconductor chips, microelectromechanical systems, digital televisions, laser and robotic medical devices, video compression, video games, and software systems. She has substantial experience representing both complainants and respondents before the International Trade Commission, and has also successfully litigated high-stakes trademark and copyright disputes.
Due to her unique background as a political organizer, Ms. Ray has a keen instinct for practical and effective ways to frame cases in lay terms for judges and juries. Ms. Ray was one of the key partners representing Uber in the high profile Waymo v. Uber trade secret litigation regarding the future of autonomous vehicles. After four days of trial, the case was settled on terms that were very favorable to Uber.
Super Lawyers recognized Ms. Ray as one of the “Top Women Attorneys in Southern California.” In addition to her client service work, Ms. Ray serves on the board of the American Business Trial Lawyers of Los Angeles. She is a former executive committee member of California Women Lawyers and the Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. Ms. Ray has succeeded in winning significant victories for her pro bono clients, including asylum in the United States and religious meals for observant prisoners.
Ms. Ray earned her J.D., cum laude, from Georgetown University Law Center, where she was an articles and notes editor of The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law and Eastern Division winner and national finalist in the Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition. Ms. Ray earned her M.P.H., with distinction, from Yale University; her B.S. in engineering from the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences of the University of Pennsylvania; and her B.S. in economics from the Wharton School of Business.
Ms. Ray is admitted to practice in state and federal courts in California, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies Inc. et al.(Northern District of California). Successfully defended Uber against a far-reaching preliminary injunction motion. Obtained favorable settlement after four days of jury trial.
Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof(International Trade Commission, 337–TA–918). Represented International Laser Group (ILG) 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 United States.
Videogame software patent casesCounsel for one or more defendants in multi-party software patent cases brought against makers and distributors of electronic entertainment products, including Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Harmonix Music Systems, et al. (District of Delaware pending); McRO Inc. v. Namco Bandai, et al. (Central District of California pending); Impulse Technology, Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp., et al. (District of Delaware); Wildcat IP Holdings LLC v. 4Kids Entertainment, Inc., et al. (Eastern District of Texas); Walker Digital LLC v. 2K Games, et al. (District of Delaware); Impulse Technology, Ltd. v. Nintendo of America, Inc., et al. (Northern District of Ohio); and Software Restore Solutions, LLC v. Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc., et al. (Northern District of Illinois).
Computer Software Protection, LLC v. Nuance Communications, Inc.(District of Delaware). Defended Nuance Communications in patent litigation involving software activation and anti-piracy measures. Obtained favorable settlement.
Toshiba v. Imation, et al.(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. Won jury verdict of liability.
Nissim Corp. v. Time Warner Inc., et al.(Southern District of Florida). Defended Time Warner, Warner Bros., and New Line Cinema in a patent infringement action involving several aspects of DVD technology. Obtained favorable settlement.
Multimedia Patent Trust v. Disney, et al.(Southern District of California). Obtained favorable settlement on behalf of several media and entertainment companies in patent litigation involving video compression.
ICHL v. Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Mitsubishi in a patent infringement case involving heat sink assemblies in televisions. Obtained voluntary dismissal after winning favorable claim constructions.
Palomar Medical Techs. & The General Hospital Corp. v. Candela Corp. (District of Massachusetts). Won summary judgment for Candela Corporation on 11 of 12 claims asserted by Palomar in a patent infringement suit involving laser hair removal devices. The summary judgment ruling knocked out over half of the damages at issue and led to a favorable settlement of this case and another patent case brought by Palomar against Syneron Inc. involving the same patents.
Cheetah-Omni v. Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Obtained judgment of non-infringement for Mitsubishi in patent litigation involving DLP televisions. Obtained Federal Circuit affirmance.
Konami / Upper Deck litigation(Central District of California). Counseled plaintiff Konami Digital Entertainment in high-profile litigation against its former distributor, The Upper Deck Company, accused of counterfeiting Konami’s product. Won summary judgment of liability for trademark counterfeiting. Case settled during trial after defendant stipulated that its counterfeiting was done willfully and a permanent injunction was issued.
Rosen v. PCCW Global(Central District of California). Won summary judgment for communications provider PCCW Global in matter alleging that PCCW had violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Veeco Instruments Inc. v. Asylum Research Corp.(Central District of California). Obtained favorable settlement for Veeco Instruments as plaintiff in patent litigation with Asylum Research Corporation, involving atomic force microscopes.
Rosen v. PCCW Global(Central District of California) Won summary judgment for communications provider PCCW Global in matter alleging that PCCW had violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
©1996-2018 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.