Attorney User
Education
Awards & Honors
In a survey of his peers published in Super Lawyers magazine, Mr. Claasen was named as one of Southern California's "Rising Stars" in intellectual property law (2014 & 2015).
Telephone
Office Location(s)
Professional Profile
Mr. Claassen is a partner in the firm’s Orange County, California office. His practice emphasizes electrical engineering patent litigation. He also represents clients in other intellectual property matters including those involving patents, trademarks, trade secrets, trade dress and copyrights.
Mr. Claassen is immersed in all stages of high stakes litigation in federal courts throughout the country and before the International Trade Commission. He has obtained favorable results for plaintiffs and successfully defended clients against infringement allegations, including negotiating early settlement, arguing motions, prevailing on motions for summary judgment, and conducting jury trials. Mr. Claassen has significant experience defending against allegations of patent infringement by non-practicing entities in some of the busiest judicial districts in the United States.
Mr. Claassen is also a registered patent attorney. He has prepared and prosecuted patent applications in a variety of technologies, including electronics, computer software, medical devices, unmanned aerial vehicles, game controllers, ophthalmic devices and methods, and surf craft. Mr. Claassen also counsels clients regarding intellectual property licenses, open source software issues, and domain name disputes.
In 2011, Mr. Claassen was selected to conduct multiple jury trials, motions, and felony preliminary hearings as first chair trial attorney with the Orange County District Attorney's Trial Attorney Partnership program.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Claassen developed embedded systems and signal processing devices as a Senior Software and Hardware Engineer at QSC Audio Products, Inc. Mr. Claassen worked as a summer associate with the firm in 2006. He joined the firm in 2007 and became a partner in 2013.
Specializing In
Cases, Articles, Speeches & Seminars
Representative Matters
Kreative Power, LLC v. Monoprice (N.D. Cal. 2014).
Obtained summary judgment of no utility patent infringement, no design patent infringement, no copyright infringement and invalidity of design patent on behalf of defendant Monoprice.
Jimmy Styks LLC v. Hobie Cat Co., LLC (C.D. Cal. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to handles for stand up paddleboards resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Salmon Licensing LLC v. Cellphone-Mate Inc. (D. Del. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to cell phone repeaters resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Traffic Information v. Fandango, Inc.(E.D. Tex. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to traffic information in mobile apps resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Sapphire Dolphin v. Monoprice (D. Del. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to communications over Bluetooth network via near field communications resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Ideative Product Ventures, Inc. v. Monoprice (E.D. Tex. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to HDMI swivel adapters resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
LaserDynamics, LLC v. Boombang Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2014).
Negotiated favorable settlement in patent infringement suit related to DVD playback resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Dominion Assets LLC v. Masimo Corp. and Cercacor Laboratories, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2014).
Knobbe Martens represented Masimo & Cercacor in complex litigation involving Dominion Assets asserting three patents regarding non-invasive blood analyte monitoring against Masimo’s Rainbow technology. The patents resulted out of research to detect blood glucose levels in the 1980s. The research company then transferred the right and title for its technologies to a subsidiary in 1991. Between 1994 and 1995, the patent office issued the three patents-in-suit to the subsidiary. Dominion acquired all of the subsidiary’s intellectual property in 2006. Irfan Lateef led a team that obtained dismissal of the suit for lack of standing at the time the complaint was filed. In 2010, Dominion had assigned the patents to Acacia – a known non-practicing entity. This deal assigned all of Dominion’s rights, title, and interest in patents, including those in suit, for Acacia to monetize them. Dominion sent a letter to Acacia in March 2012, seeking to terminate the agreement and claiming the company had not made any progress in monetizing the technology. Despite telling the court that Acacia agreed to the request, Dominion did not sign Acacia’s proposed termination language because of added terms. The parties did not execute a written termination agreement until April 2014.
Canatelo, LLC v. Toshiba America (D.P.R. 2013).
Represented Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. in a patent infringement action related to automated security camera technology. Obtained favorable dismissal.
U.S. Ethernet Innovations Inc. v. Acer et al. (E.D. Tex. and N.D. Cal.).
Defended Toshiba Corporation to successfully obtain summary judgment in a significant non-practicing entity case. The plaintiff had sued over 30 defendants for infringing patents directed to Ethernet technology. Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California granted judgment of invalidity on two patents and non-infringement of two others. Successfully transferred the case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California.
In the Matter of Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-850 (U.S.I.T.C. 2013).
Submitted public interest Statement on behalf of T-Mobile USA, Inc. encouraging Commission to decline to issue an exclusion order that would compensate the patentee for non-infringing features of the accused products.
Charles C. Freeny, et al. v. Western Digital Corp. (E.D. Tex. 2013).
Negotiated favorable settlement resulting in dismissal of case with prejudice.
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Capita Techs. Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2012).
Negotiated stipulated dismissal of case following service of invalidity contentions on behalf of defendant.
Agri-Cover Inc. v. Ben Sabio (C.D. Cal. 2011).
Successfully enforced trademark on behalf of owner.
Hawaii AirBoards, LLC v. Hobie Designs, Inc. (D. Hawaii 2011).
Negotiated favorable settlement resulting in dismissal of case.
In the Matter of Certain Computer Notebook Products and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-705 (U.S.I.T.C. 2010).
Obtained summary determination for complainant Toshiba regarding respondents’ affirmative defenses in patent infringement lawsuit involving hardware and software components of notebook computers.
Commonwealth Scientific and Indus. Research Org. v. Toshiba America Info. Sys., Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex. 2007).
Represented Toshiba in a patent infringement lawsuit involving wireless LAN standards.
Discovision Assoc. v. Toshiba Corp. (S.D.N.Y. 2008).
Represented Toshiba in lawsuit involving breach of patent license agreement for optical disc playback and recording products.
Light Valve Solutions, LLC v. 3M Company, et al. (N.D. Ga. 2008).
Represented Toshiba in patent infringement lawsuit involving projectors.
Articles
Co-author, "Another Reason to Coordinate Discovery in Parallel Litigation – Circumvention in Section 1782 Requests," International Litigation News, Newsletter of the International Bar Association Legal Practice Division (April 2013)
Speeches & Seminars
Howard T. Markey Inn of Court, “Expert Witnesses in Patent Litigation: From Teva to Trial” Irvine (March 2015)
Brian Claassen, “Intellectual Property Basics – SBIR/STTR and Tech Transfer,” Cal State Fullerton’s Research Week (March 22, 2013)
Professional Memberships
Federal Bar Association - Orange County Chapter
Director (2015-2017)
Howard T. Markey Inn of Court
ProVisors