Skip to main content
John Francis Bennett

John Francis Bennett

Practice areas:

Patent Infringement, Intellectual Property, Copyright Infringement, Litigation

How would you rate this lawyer?

If you’re a current or former client, share your thoughts (anonymously, if you prefer). Would you recommend this lawyer to other clients?

Review John Bennett

About Me

John is an accomplished patent litigator who also has extensive experience with cases involving trademark, copyright, trade secrets, unfair competition, and other intellectual property claims. John also has significant experience handling complex business litigations. Successful litigation stems from persuasion through meticulous preparation and effective communication, which John has mastered to the benefit of his clients. His experience covers a wide range of technologies, and he has represented clients in matters before federal district courts throughout the U.S., including the largest patent multidistrict litigation in history. John is a speaker on a variety of intellectual property topics.


 


Representative Experience


 



  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to computer forensics technologies—after a trial, the ITC found no violation (In the Matter of Certain Computer Forensic Devices and Products Containing the Same, International Trade Commission, Case No. 337-TA-799).

  • Defended accused infringer in largest multidistrict litigation in U.S. history against patent claims involving portfolio of more than 50 patents relating to automated call distributors, interactive voice response products, computer telephone integration, and speech recognition (case is ongoing—In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, CD California Case No. 2:07-ml-01816).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to DVD scene selection menus—case settled on confidential terms after jury trial (Patent Harbor, LLC v. Audiovox Corporation, ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00361).

  • Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to food packaging technology in declaratory judgment action—case settled on confidential terms during jury trial (Huhtamaki, Inc. v. PWP Industries, Inc., SD Ohio, Case No. 1:09-cv-795).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to on-hold music telephone systems—obtained summary judgment of no liability (Info-Hold, Inc. v. Muzak Holdings LLC, et al., SD Ohio, Case No. 1:11-cv-283).

  • Defended accused infringers against patent claims related to DVD technology—case settled on confidential terms (TV Interactive Data Corporation v. Sony Corporation, et al., ND California, Case No. 5:10-cv-00475).

  • Represented trade secret owner against former employee for alleged trade secret misappropriation and breach of noncompete agreement—obtained permanent injunction after trial (DNA Diagnostics Center, Inc. v. Pam Brown, Hamilton County, Ohio, Case No. A0702962).

  • Defended accused infringers in multidistrict litigation against patent claims related to lip-syncing automation in video games (case is ongoing—McRO, Inc., dba Planet Blue v. Codemasters USA Group, et al., D. Del. Case Nos. 1:13-cv-01017 and 1:13-cv-1756).

  • Defended accused infringer in multidistrict litigation against patent claims related to transportation logistics technologies (case is ongoing—R+L Carriers, Inc. v. Pegasus Transtech Corp., SD Ohio Case No. SD OH, 1:09-cv-00177-SJD).

  • Represented accused infringer in dispute concerning alleged indemnity obligations arising from patent case—case settled on confidential terms (Kroger Co. v. Ateb, SD Ohio, Case No. 1:2009-cv-00196).

  • Represented patent owner against accused infringers related to medical practitioner verification technologies—case settled on confidential terms (Medversant Technologies, LLC v. Morrisey Associates, Inc., CD California Case No. 2:09-cv-05031).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies for monitoring traffic information—case settled on confidential terms (Cincinnati Bell Inc. v. Traffic Information LLC, Oregon, Case No. 3:10-cv-01453).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to interactive video networks—case settled on confidential terms (EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al., ED Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00379).

  • Defended accused infringers against patent claims related to vehicle status reporting systems—cases settled on confidential terms (Arrivalstar S.A. et al v. Trailer Bridge, Inc. et al., MD Florida, Case No. 8:09-cv-01307; Cincinnati Bell, Inc. v. Arrivalstar S.A., SD of Ohio, Case No. 1:11-cv-00274).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet technologies—case settled on confidential terms (GeoTag v. Medicine Shoppe, ED of Texas Case No. 2:11-cv-404).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to telephone encryption technologies—case settled on confidential terms (ISwitch, LLC v. Cincinnati Bell Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-118).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies allowing secure financial transactions—case settled on confidential terms (Swipe Innovations, LLC v. Elavon, Inc., ED Texas, Case No. 9:12-cv-0040).

  • Represented copyright owner of costume against accused infringers—case settled on confidential terms (Stagecraft Costuming Inc., v. Househaunters, et al., SD of Ohio Case No. 1:10-cv-00917).

  • Defended ISP against claims for accused copyright infringement—court granted motion to dismiss (Allure Jewelers, Inc. v. Ulu, et al., SD Ohio Case No. 1:12-cv-00091-MRB).

  • Represented aircraft parts supplier against company for unfair business practices related to alleged PMA misuse—case settled on confidential terms (Transicoil LLC v. Aaxico Sales Inc., et al., SD Florida Case No. 1:10-cv-24427-PAS).

  • Represented trademark owner against accused infringer—case settled on confidential terms (Situs, Inc. v. Situs Realty Corp., SD Indiana Case No. 1:09-cv-01570).

  • Represented patent owner against accused infringers related to laser technologies (case is ongoing—Newport Corporation v. Lighthouse Photonics Inc., CD California, Case No. 8:12-cv-00719).

  • Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to variable data printing technology (case is ongoing—Tesseron, Ltd. v. Punch International NV et al., MD Florida, Case No. 6:10-cv-00909).

  • Represented patent owner against accused infringer related to technology for analyzing compilations of retail sales data (case is ongoing—dunnhumby USA, LLC v. emnos USA Corporation, ND Illinois Case No. 1:13-cv-00399).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to Internet shopping cart methods (case is ongoing—CWC v. Hugo Boss, ED Texas Case No. 6:12-cv-00674).

  • Defended accused infringer against patent claims related to technologies for recording and monitoring of call centers (case is ongoing—Verint Systems, Inc. v. CallCopy, Inc., SD Ohio Case No. 2:13-cv-942).

  • Represented copyright owner against alleged infringement related to consumer baby products (case is ongoing—Kohus v. Graco Children’s Products, Inc., et al., SD Ohio Case No. 1:09-cv-503).


 

More 

Practice Areas

Licensed since 2002

  1. Patent Infringement: 75%
  2. Copyright Infringement: 10%
  3. Intellectual Property: 10%
  4. Litigation: 5%

Attorney Endorsements

4 total 

  • No photo

    I endorse this lawyer's work.

    More 

    Craig Hoffman Lawsuits & Disputes Attorney
    Relationship: Co-worker

  • Adam Corey Sherman

    I endorse this lawyer's work.

    More 

    Adam Sherman Internet Attorney
    Relationship: Worked together on matter

Contact Info

Ulmer & Berne

600 Vine Street
Suite 2800
Cincinnati, OH, 45202-2409

Resume

License
StateStatusAcquiredUpdated
OHActive200207/18/2015

Professional Misconduct

We have not found any instances of professional misconduct for this lawyer.
Avvo Contributions
Legal Answers
Awards
Award NameGrantorDate Granted
AV Preeminent RatedMartindale-Hubbell2014
Rising StarOhio Super Lawyers2011
Rising StarOhio Super Lawyers2010
First PlaceAnderson Publishing Moot Court Competition1999

Work Experience
TitleCompany NameDuration
CounselUlmer & Berne2014 - Present
AssociateBaker & Hostetler2010 - 2014
AssociateVorys Sater Seymour & Pease2006 - 2010
AssociatePorter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP2002 - 2006
ClerkPratt, Singer & Thomas2000 - 2000
ExternU.S. District Court1999 - 1999

Associations
Association NamePosition NameDuration
Cincinnati Bar Association, Intellectual Property Litigation Practice CommitteeChair2014 - Present
Cincinnati Bar Association, Intellectual Property Litigation Practice CommitteeVice Chair2013 - 2014
Cincinnati Intellectual Property Law AssociationMember2010 - Present
Federal Circuit Bar AssociationMember2010 - Present
American Bar AssociationMember2001 - Present
Cincinnati Bar AssociationMember2001 - Present
Ohio State Bar AssociationMember2001 - Present

Legal Cases
Case NameOutcome
In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, C.D. Cal. 2:07-ml-01816-RGK-FFMN/A
Cincinnati Bell, Inc. v. Arrivalstar S.A. et al., SD OH 1-11-cv-00274Settled
EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al, ED TX 6-10-cv-00379Settled

See all Legal Cases 

Publications
Publication NameTitleDate
CincyIP NewsletterIP In Our Backyard: An Interesting Look Into IP Cases Here in the Southern District2013
Baker & Hostetler Executive AlertRise in Lawsuits Concerning False Patent Marking2010

Education
School NameMajorDegreeGraduated
University of Cincinnati College of LawLawJD - Juris Doctor2001
University of St. ThomasPolitical ScienceBA - Bachelor of Arts1996

Speaking Engagements
Conference NameTitleDate
Supreme Court Roundup: 10 IP Cases in One Term!Summary of Supreme Court's Recent Patent, Copyright, and Lanham Act Cases2014
How to Avoid the Traps and Hazards Associated with Trade Secrets, Non-Competes, and Patent LitigationUnderstanding and Managing Patent Litigation - And Why Patent Trolls Can Really Be Scary2014
Current US Legislative, Administrative and Judicial Proposals – Dealing with Trolls and Other IssuesModerator - Current US Legislative, Administrative and Judicial Proposals – Dealing with Trolls and Other Issues2014
Intellectual Property LitigationOhio Covenants Not To Compete2013
Intellectual Property Litigation CLEProving Disgorgement Damages in a Copyright Infringement Case2011