Robert R. Brunelli
Shareholder
(303) 863-2980

1560 Broadway
Suite #1200
Denver, CO 80202

Mr. Brunelli is an integral part of his clients’ intellectual property management teams.

As head of the firm’s Litigation practice, Mr. Brunelli has more than 30 years of experience counseling early-stage start-ups to multi-national corporations in trial and appellate courts and before governmental tribunals.

He has successfully managed and litigated hundreds of complex intellectual property actions in most Federal District Courts in the United States, Federal Courts of Appeal, International Trade Commission, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the United States Patent Office Board of Appeals and Interferences, and in UDRP proceedings.

Combining his business and legal expertise, Mr. Brunelli covers the full spectrum of transactions and issues facing companies in the technology sectors.   He understands the business challenges and the risks posed by potential and actual lawsuits, and he has the skills and experience his clients require to realize the best possible outcome, even if that outcome is not one which is most desired by the client.

He is AV Preeminent® peer review rated in accordance with Martindale-Hubbell® certification procedures, and has been selected by attorney peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers® 2015.  In addition, he has been selected as a Colorado Super Lawyer year after year.  Mr. Brunelli is a founding member of the Colorado Intellectual Property American Inn of Court.

Intellectual Property Litigation
Patent Litigation
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Intellectual Property in Employment
Technology Transactions and Licensing
Trade Secrets and Confidentiality
Patent Prosecution
Patent Office Post-Grant Proceedings
Trademark and Copyright
Electrical Engineering
Computer Hardware and Software
Business Methods
Mechanical Engineering
Life Sciences

Vermont Law School (J.D., cum laude, Law Review, 1990)

Worcester State College (B.S., Computer Science, cum laude, 1986)

Colorado, 1990

United States District Court, Colorado, 1990

United States Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit, 1991

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1991

United States Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 1992

United States Patent and Trademark Office, 1994

United States Supreme Court, 2016

American Bar Association, 1988

- Patent, Trademark & Copyright Section member

- Litigation Section member

Colorado Intellectual Property American Inn of Court Founding Board Member

Chambers & Partners USA Guide Leading Individual 2016-2017.

Managing IP Stars, 2015

IAM Patent 1000, 2015-2016

Best Lawyers®, 2015-2018

Colorado Super Lawyers, 2010-2017

5280 Magazine Top Denver Attorneys, 2015-2017

Martindale-Hubbell® AV Preeminent®  Rating

Featured: "Who Owns the Business Data on Your Personal Phone," Denver Business Journal, Aug. 11, 2016.

Author: "A ‘Tip of the Hat’ from the Supreme Court: Cuozzo and Why Differing Standards Continue," June 2016

Author: Key takeaways from SCOTUS ruling for patent holders and infringers alike, June 2016

Co-Author: "Considering the Compromises of the New PATENT Act," Patently-0, May 19, 2015.

Speaker: "Maintaining Intellectual Property Protection through Confidentiality and Non-Use Agreements," American Chemical Society National Conference, Denver, Colorado, 2015.

Speaker: "IP Ownership Issues," American Chemical Society National Conference, Denver, Colorado, 2015.

 

SCOTUS ruling places new limits on patent suit locations, May 22, 2017 -- Brunelli featured in Law360 article evaluating the Court's ruling and its potential impact...read more.

Denver Business Journal Law Quarterly, Aug. 12, 2016 -- Brunelli featured in article highlighting need for policies around use of personal devices at work. Read more...

Brunelli recognized by Best Lawyers in America 2017 read more...

Pharmafile -- Jan. 2015 -- What does the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Teva v. Sandoz mean for patent cases for other pharmaceutical companies in the US? Rob Brunelli is quoted on the topic in this article …read more.

Intellectual Property Magazine -- Nov. 2014 -- Should factual conclusions made by a district court when examining claim construction be given deference on appeal or should they be reviewed de novo? Robert R Brunelli and David B Kellis examine the issues...read more.

Law Week Colorado -- Nov. 10, 2014 -- Sheridan Ross Co-President Robert Brunelli provides his perspective on the role the economy plays in legal actions by non-practicing entities...read more.

Law360, Oct. 10, 2014 -- Robert Brunelli was quoted October 10, 2014 in a Law360 article discussing the potential impacts of the Supreme Court case Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc. et al.  Read more...

Best Lawyers in America® 2015, August 19, 2014 -- Four attorneys from Sheridan Ross P.C., a Denver-based Intellectual Property law firm, including Rob Brunelli were listed in The Best Lawyers in America® 2015 in the areas of Copyright Law, Trademark Law, IP Litigation and Patent Law. Read more...

Law360, June 20, 2014 -- Robert Brunelli was quoted in an article regarding on Supreme Court’s much anticipated decision in Alice v. CLS Bank. Read more...

Law360, June 2, 2014 -- Sheridan Ross partners Robert Brunelli and Benjamin Lieb are quoted in a roundup story on the significance of two United States Supreme Court rulings in Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc. and Limelight Networks Inc. v. Akamai Technologies Inc. matters. Read more...

Law360, May 13, 2014 -- Robert Brunelli contributed to an article providing reaction to the Supreme Court’s decisions in Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Systems Inc and Octane Fitness LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc., that make it easier for courts to sanction plaintiffs that bring meritless patent infringement lawsuits. According to Brunelli, the opinions change the law significantly. Read more...

CNET, May 11, 2014 -- Robert Brunelli was quoted in an article regarding a patent Amazon won earlier this year that covers a technique for taking photos with a no-fuss background. According to the article, Amazon’s patent raises questions the merits of the US patent system. Read more...

Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC v. Behavioral Recognition Systems, Inc.; (S.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Spyderco, Inc. v. Darriel K. Caston; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

SteelStrike Leather Products, Inc. v. United Leather USA, LLC et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for copyright infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Bosch Security Systems, Inc. et al. v. Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC; (D. Del.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC v. ADT Security Services, Inc. et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genelex Corporation; (W.D. Wash.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genesis Genetics Institute, LLC and Stanley Dickson, Jr.; (E.D. Mich.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genetics & IVF Institute, Inc.; (E.D. Va.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. PreventionGenetics, LLC; (W.D. Wis.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Reproductive Genetics Institute, Inc.; (N.D. Ill.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Reprogenetics L.L.C.; (D.N.J.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Hydro Engineering, Inc. v. Kärcher North America, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendant in connection with contested subpoena.  Issues resolved under confidential terms.

Miller International, Inc. v. Sidran, Inc. et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trade dress infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Pelco, Inc. v. Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC; (E.D. Cal.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Qualmark Corporation v. Qualmark Label, Inc. and Kyle Putzier; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Spyderco, Inc. v. Matthew Christensen; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement and defamation.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. GN Resound A/S et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Sonic Innovations, Inc.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Starkey Laboratories, Inc.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Widex A/S et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Cochlear Limited et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. 454 Life Sciences Corporation; (D. Conn.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Geneseek, Inc.; (N. Deb.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. Steffen et al.; (D.N.J) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of breach of contract, breach of employment agreement, misappropriation of trade secrets. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. Calvert et al.; (D.N.J.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of breach of contract, breach of employment agreement, misappropriation of trade secrets. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Starkey Laboratories, Inc. v. Acacia Research Corporation et al.; (D. Minn.) — Counsel for defendant in declaratory judgment action for claim of patent non-infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. American Esoteric Laboratories et al.; (W.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. Ronald Williams et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of breach of contract, breach of employment agreement, misappropriation of trade secrets. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Patent Group LLC v. Spyderco, Inc.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for defendant in action for false patent marking. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Limagrain Cereal Seeds, LLC v. Genesis Brand Seed, Ltd. et al.; (W.D. Mich.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Intelligent Designs 2000 Corporation v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Mercury Security Corporation v. Lenel Systems International, Inc.; (S.D.N.Y.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of copyright infringement, breach of contract. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Spyderco, Inc. v. A-Z Distributors, LLC et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of trademark and trade dress infringement. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Zhongshan Rising Dragon Foreign Technology Co. Ltd. et al. v. Jacuzzi, Inc. et al.; (E.D. Tenn.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adobe Systems Incorporated v. Royal Distribution, Inc. et al.; (N.D. Cal.) — Counsel for defendants in action for claim of copyright infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Caught Fish Enterprises et al. v. Action Manufacturing, LLC et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Beckman Coulter, Inc. et al.; (D. Wis.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Oldcastle Precast, Inc. v. Granite Precasting & Concrete, Inc.; (W.D. Wash.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of copyright infringement, unfair competition, deceptive trade practices. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Select Sector SPDR Trust v. PowerShares Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II et al.; (S.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of trademark infringement. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Waters Industries, Inc. v. Eddie Bauer LLC et al.; (N.D. Ill.) — Counsel for defendant in action for claim of patent infringement. Action successfully resolved on confidential terms.

The Kong Company, LLC v. OurPet’s Company; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action concerning claims for a declaratory judgment on trademark and patent infringement issues. Successfully settled action.

Microsoft Corporation v. Royal Distribution, Inc., Royal Discount and Katrina Snowden; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of copyrights. Successfully settled action on confidential terms.

Professional Bull Riders, Inc. v. Huffman; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of copyrights, breach of agreement and defamation. Successfully settled action on confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genzyme Corporation; American Arbitration Association. — Counsel for plaintiff in action for breach of patent license agreement. Achieved a successful outcome for the Plaintiff through post-hearing award.

Innovative Global Systems LLC v. Turnpike Global Technologies LLC et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of several patents directed to vehicle data collection and communication systems. Successfully settled action on confidential terms.

Woolrich, Inc. and John Rich & Sons Investment Holding Company v. Eddie Bauer, Inc.; (M.D. Pa) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of trademark. Case successfully resolved on confidential terms.

Fasteners, Inc. v. RL Industries, Inc., Wormington and Konfrst; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for computer fraud and abuse, misappropriation of trade secrets, conspiracy, interference with contractual relations, misappropriation of business value, deceptive trade practices, unfair competition. Action successfully concluded through series of confidential settlements.

Professional Bull Riders, Inc. v. Fred Culbertson et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of trademark. Case successfully and confidentially settled.

StormTrap, LLC v. Oldcastle Precast, Inc.; (D.N.J.) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of patent directed to storm water collection systems. Case successfully and confidentially settled.

Data Physics Corporation v. Qualmark Corporation and Qualmark Ling Corporation; (N.D. Cal.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of trademark. Case dismissed based upon first filed 2007 case in Colorado.

B & S Plastics, Inc. v. Zhongshan Rising Dragon Foreign Technology Co. Ltd.; (C.D. Cal.) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of patent. Case confidentially resolved after achieving reversal of default judgment entered against defendant.

Bushberger v. Protecto Wrap Company; (E.D. Wis.) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of patent directed to building sealing materials. Case dismissed on Summary Judgment.

Jacobson v. XY Inc. et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for declaration of patent ownership, breach of contract, interference with contract and fraud. Portion of case confidentially settled. Remainder of case tried to a jury, who awarded Plaintiff damages for fraud.

Pamlab L.L.C. v. Cura Pharmaceutical Company, Inc., Bi-Coastal Pharmaceutical Corporation and Andapharm, L.L.C.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of patent on a pharmaceutical. Case confidentially settled.

Qualmark Corporation and Qualmark Ling Corporation v. Data Physics Corporation; (D. Colo.) —  Counsel for plaintiffs in action for infringement of trademark. Case confidentially and successfully settled.

GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Corp. v. Genetic Technologies Limited; (S.D.N.Y.) — Counsel for defendant in action for declaration of non-infringement of defendant’s patents. Case successfully settled by GE taking a royalty bearing license to involved patents.

Intelligent Designs 2000 Corp. v. Nite Ize, Inc.; American Arbitration Association, — Counsel for plaintiff in action for breach of patent license agreement and infringement of design patent. Substantial post hearing award for plaintiff achieved.

Monsanto Company v. Genetic Technologies Limited; (E.D. Mo.) — Counsel for defendant in action for declaration of non-infringement of patents. Case resolved through acceptance of royalty bearing license to involved patents by plaintiff.

Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Universal City Studios Productions LLP and Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Does 1-8.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiffs in action for infringement of copyrights.

Kathryn L. Proffitt v. Bob Cornuke, B.A.S.E. Institute, Anchor Productions JV and Global Publishing Services, LLC.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of copyrights. Case confidentially settled after preliminary injunction denied.

Lava Trading, Inc. v. Sonic Trading Management LLC, Joseph A. Cammarata and Louis Liu; (S.D.N.Y.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of patent directed to automated securities trading system. Case dismissed upon stipulation after Markman hearing order in favor of defendants. Case confidentially and successfully resolved after successful Federal Circuit appeal.

New Sensations, L.L.C. v. Conair Corporation; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of patent. Infringement, validity and enforceability of patent proved on Summary Judgment and bench trial. Damages trial to a jury, who awarded significant damages.

Colorado State University Research Foundation v. Cryolife, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of patents and breach of patent license contract. Successfully and confidentially resolved.

Do the Hustle, LLC v. Baja International, LTD., Baja Denver, L.L.C., C & T Management Co. of Colorado Springs, Inc., SFS Ventures, LLC, Joseph Frankel and Larry Siegel; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of trademark and trade dress. Case successfully resolved.

Go Pro Ltd. v. River Graphics, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of trademark. Case successfully resolved after defeating defendants motion for summary judgment.

Watcher Technologies, LLC v. Sonic Trading Management LLC, Sonic Technologies LLC, Sonic Trading LLC, Louis Feng Liu and Joseph A. Cammarata; (S.D.N.Y.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of copyrights. Case resolved  successfully and confidentially.

Caught Fish Enterprises, LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd. v. Contek, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiffs in action for infringement of patent. Case successfully resolved after successful Markman hearing and motion for Summary Judgment.

CCS Fitness, Inc. v. Life Fitness, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of patent.

Michael P. Callicrate v. Wadsworth Manufacturing, Inc.; (D. Mont.) United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of patent, resolved after jury trial and successful appeal.

Windsor Industries, Inc. v. Pro-Team, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in declaratory judgment action for non-infringement of patent. Plaintiff proved claim on Summary Judgment.

Irdeto Access, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite Corporation, Kudelski and Nagravision, S.A.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendants in action for infringement of patent. Case resolved successfully after Summary Judgment granted to defendant.

Quanterra Inc. v. Warner-Lambert Company; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendant in action for infringement of trademark. Judgment for defendant after jury trial.

Cinemasource, Inc. v. Premier Datavision, Inc.; (D. Conn.) — Counsel for defendant in action for violation of antitrust laws and action for breach of contractual/business relationships. Case successfully settled after motions for summary judgment filed.

Sports Car Club of America, Inc. v. Professional Sportscar Racing, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of trademark.

Hallmark Building Company v. Robbin R. Mitchell, et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of copyrights. Verdict for plaintiff.

Oceanside Sales & Marketing, Inc. v. Mark Baxter and Margaret Baxter; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of trade dress and copyrights. Preliminary injunction granted, case subsequently settled.

Ram-Line, Inc. v. Butler Creek Corporation; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for infringement of patent. Willful infringement proved at trial.

 

Expert Witness Activity

Rossi Ventures, Inc. et al. v. Antonio Pasquini et al. —  United States District Court for the District of Colorado; non-testifying expert to provide guidance to defendants in matter concerning trademark and unfair competition issues; case settled under confidential terms.

PartMiner Worldwide, Inc. v. Siliconexpert Technologies Inc. and Jeffrey J. Williams; — United States District Court for Colorado, Civil Action No. 09-cv-00586-MSK-MJW; expert report issued and deposition testimony given regarding violation of trade secret law.

Manthei v. Phillips et al.; Boulder County District Court, Colorado, Civil Action No. 08-cv-1007; expert summary issued concerning patent litigation negligence issues; case settled shortly thereafter.

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Isaac G. Engida, d/b/a I and G Liquors;— United States District Court Colorado, Civil Action No. 06-cv-00225-LTB; expert declaration issued regarding request for award of attorney’s fees concerning violations of the Anticounterfeiting Consumer Protection Act of 1996.

Okuma Nutritionals v. Quest for Life; — Non-testifying expert to provide guidance in matter concerning trademark and unfair competition issues.

NurseCore Management Services, LLC v. NurseCorps, LLC; — El Paso County District Court, Colorado, Civil Action No. 06-cv-4093; testifying expert regarding claim of willful trademark infringement; report provided.

Air Control Science, Inc. et al. v. Dust Control, Inc. et al.; — United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Civil Action No. 1:05-cv-00108-WFD; re: federal patent infringement; report provided.

Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O’ Lakes, Inc. et al.; — United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Civil Action No. 04-D-0329 (CBS); re: federal trademark infringement; deposition given; accepted as Expert Witness and oral testimony presented at July 2007 trial.

The Heat Exchange Heating and Air Conditioning, LLC v. The Heat Exchanger Experts, Inc.; — Larimer County District Court, Case No. 03-CV-634; re: federal and state service mark infringement; no deposition given; report accepted as expert testimony at trial.

Santangelo Law Offices, P.C. v. Touchstone Home Health, LLC; American Arbitration Association; review of reasonableness of fees charged in trademark dispute; report provided.