Joshua Stowell

Partner

Orange County

949-760-0404

joshua.stowell@knobbe.com

Download vCard

Overview

Experience

Recognition

Resources

For over a decade, Joshua has successfully represented and counseled clients in technology and intellectual property disputes. He has litigated cases relating to patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, unfair competition, licensing agreements and other technology contracts. Joshua’s clients range from large, public corporations to small startups and individuals. Through this diverse background, Joshua is able to appreciate the litigation goals of all clients and tailor the litigation strategy to effectively achieve those goals.

Clients rely on Joshua’s deep knowledge of technology and intellectual property law. He has litigated cases in district courts throughout the nation on behalf of both intellectual property owners and accused infringers. He has helped recover over $100 million in damages on behalf of plaintiffs and invalidated numerous patents on behalf of defendants. He has successfully argued before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, obtained damages and attorney fee awards through arbitration, and handled administrative proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Joshua is valued by clients and colleagues alike for consistently strong and effective case strategy, stellar work product, and proven negotiation and advocacy prowess.

Competitive by nature, Joshua thrives under the pressure that fast-paced IP litigation demands. He is totally dedicated to understanding his client’s business and helping them advance in the marketplace. Over the course of his career, Joshua has assisted clients across a range of industries including medical devices and procedures, electronics and semiconductor, software and information technology, construction and home improvement, and sporting goods and recreation. Regardless of the matter at hand, Joshua is appreciated for his ability to analyze the key issues and develop distinct solutions for resolving or winning the case.

Joshua is co-chair of the Knobbe’s Medical Device Litigation Practice Group. He has authored numerous articles and is co-author of a book chapter on patent litigation. He is actively involved in a number of legal organizations including the Association for Business Trial Lawyers and the Intellectual Property Owners Association.

Education

Duke University School of Law (J.D., 2006), Executive Editor - Duke Law & Technology Review, cum laude

University of Washington (UW) (B.S. Chemical Engineering, 2001), with distinction

Duke University School of Law

University of Washington (UW)

State Bar of California

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court - Central District of California

U.S. District Court - Northern District of California

U.S. District Court - Southern District of California

U.S. District Court - Southern District of Indiana

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Chemical

Electronics & Semiconductors

Medical Devices & Procedures

Pharmaceuticals

Sporting Goods & Recreation

Practice Areas

PTAB Ex Parte Patent Proceedings

Electrical, Semiconductor & Computer Technology Litigation

Appellate Litigation

Hatch-Waxman Litigation

ITC Litigation

Medical Device Litigation

Trade Secret & Employment Mobility Litigation

Trademark & Brand Protection Litigation

Patents

PTAB IPR & Post-Grant Proceedings

CardiAQ Valve Technologies v. Neovasc (Fed. Circ. 2017)

Successfully defended appeal of $112M judgment in trade secret misappropriation case.

CardiAQ Valve Technologies v. Neovasc (D. Mass 2016), aff'd (Fed. Circ. 2017)

Tried trade secret misappropriation case relating to medical device technology, resulting in $70M jury verdict. Plaintiff designed transcatheter mitral valve replacement device that was first ever to be placed in humans. Plaintiff hired Defendant to help assemble prototypes under an NDA. Defendant's lead engineer began designing a directly competing device while working on Plaintiff's prototypes, but decided not to tell Plaintiff as their relationship continued for six more months, during which Plaintiff shared numerous confidential designs. The court found Defendant’s misappropriation willful and further awarded Plaintiff $21M in enhanced damages, and over $20M in interest for a total judgment of $112M. In September 2017, the judgment was affirmed entirely, and has since been satisfied.

Resh v. Hetzner (C.D. Cal., Fed. Cir. 2015)

Resh v. Hetzner (C.D. Cal., Fed. Cir. 2015) Invalidated patent on summary judgment for defendant by demonstrating that the claimed features of pool products were obvious in light of the prior art. Argued successfully to obtain affirmance on appeal.

JS Products v. Kabo Tool (D. Nev., Fed. Cir. 2015)

JS Products v. Kabo Tool (D. Nev., Fed. Cir. 2015) Invalidated patent on summary judgment for DJ plaintiff by demonstrating that micron level dimensional differences in accused tools retailed at Lowe’s were also inherently present in prior art.

Successfully obtained affirmance on appeal.

Superior Court for the State of California v. ISD Corp., AAA arbitration (2014)

Represented software vendor at trial and defeated claim brought by the state courts of California that they could terminate client’s supply of case management software. Also successfully recovered attorneys’ fees for the client.

Cook Inc. v. Endologix, Inc. (S.D. Ind. 2013)

Represented defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit involving stent grafts for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms. The case resulted in a settlement.

Rugged Liner, Inc. v. CYC Eng’g, Inc., 2:10-cv-12203 (E.D. Mich. 2010).

Represented defendant against qui tam false patent marking action. Successfully obtained dismissal of the suit.

Toshiba Corp. v. Wistron Corp., SACV 10-00074 (C.D. Cal. 2010).

Represented Toshiba in a patent infringement lawsuit involving patents related to laptop technologies. The case resulted in a settlement.

Swimways Corp. v. Bravo Sports, 1:08cv1116 (E.D. Va. 2008).

Represented defendant chair maker in a patent infringement lawsuit involving collapsible canopy chair technology. The case resulted in a settlement.

The Laryngeal Mask Co. Ltd. v. Ambu A/S, 07-CV-1988 (S.D. Cal. 2007).

Represented medical-device maker and patent owner in a patent infringement lawsuit involving laryngeal mask devices. 618 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2010). On appeal, obtained reversal of noninfringement and invalidity for lack of written description.

Applied Medical Resources Corp. v. United States Surgical Corp., 448 F.3d 1324, reh’g en banc denied, (Fed. Cir. 2006).

Represented medical-device maker and patent owner in a patent infringement lawsuit involving trocar technology. The case resulted in a jury verdict of patent validity and noninfringement.

Tsugita v. Zadno-Azizi, Patent Interference No. 105,517 (BPAI 2006).

Represented senior party in a patent interference proceeding involving stent and stent deployment technology. The interference resulted in a settlement.

Awards & Honors

Named a "Life Sciences Star" for Patent Litigation in the Legal Media Group's (LMG) "LMG Life Sciences" Guide (2023)

Articles

“The Answer and Other Responsive Filings,” Chapter 6 in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook Cumulative Supplement (4ed. BNA Books 2011-2016), co-author.

“The Answer and Other Responsive Filings,” Chapter 6 in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook (4ed. BNA 2015), co-author.

“The Answer and Other Responsive Filings,” Chapter 6 in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook Cumulative Supplement (3ed. BNA Books 2011-2014), co-author.

“The Answer and Other Responsive Filings,” Chapter 6 in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook (3ed. BNA 2010), co-author.

“Do You Feel Like I Do? – Advocating Patent Cases With Emotion,” American Intellectual Property Law Association (Spring Meeting 2010), co-author.

“The Answer and Other Responsive Filings,” Chapter 5 in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook Cumulative Supplement (2ed. BNA Books 2007-2009), co-author.

“Changing Legal Landscape for Patent Trolls,” IEEE-USA Today’s Engineer (October 2008), co-author.

"The Supreme Court Takes on Patent Law," Side Bar, Federal Litigation Section of the Federal Bar Association (Summer 2007), co-author.

"A Supreme End to Patent Trolls?" Orange County Lawyer, The Orange County Bar Association (August 2007), co-author.

Willful Infringement and the Evidentiary Value of Opinion Letters after Knorr-Bremse v. Dana, 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0005 (2005).

Speeches & Seminars

"Boilerplate Contract Provisions That Can Bite You in IP Litigation," Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) Webcast (September 2018)