Architects of ROI in IP

Attorney Advertising Intellectual property is one of the most litigation clients and we have recovered billions underleveraged assets in investment portfolios. of dollars on their behalf. Along the way, we have Knowing how to monetize these assets can expedite repeatedly had to decide whether to invest our own and maximize your overall return on investment. capital and resources towards a client’s recovery. At Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. we help investors evaluate intellectual property, Figuring out how much intellectual property identify hidden value, and find ways to monetize is worth, however, is no easy task. Getting the intellectual property technology and innovation assets. Our guidance answer right can mean increasing an investment’s on intellectual property monetization reflects our return. Making a mistake can be both costly experience turning ideas into cash and the know- and embarrassing. To evaluate the strength monetization how we’ve earned litigating big IP cases on both and value of the intellectual property held by sides of the courtroom. investors, we developed our proprietary Strategic IP Assessment. When combined with our IP Why are we so good at this? Because we litigation experience and a full complement of have to be. As an architect in alternative fee in-house Ph.D. science advisors and financial arrangements, we have had to excel at identifying and economic consultants, this process makes us valuable intellectual property assets that can uniquely situated among law firms and other IP rapidly generate returns on our own investment. professionals to deliver an actionable, real-world We spent the last twenty years partnering with IP IP evaluation. Case Studies How we can help you build Intergraph Licensing Campaign: return on your investment Our firm successfully guided Intergraph in obtaining settlements of $500 million from industry computer and processor manufacturers related to microprocessor and parallel processing patents.

Pre-investment due diligence: Fonar MRI Monetization: We assisted Fonar Corporation in its efforts to monetize We have decades of experience valuing intellectual property portfolios. We can apply our proprietary techniques to provide its patents related to MRI technology. After a jury verdict you a window into the range of returns possible on your potential investment. Likewise, we can identify risk by evaluating against General Electric for $110 million, Siemens, Philips, potential intellectual property liability existing within the market. Toshiba, Hitachi, Shimadzu, Health Images, and Elscint licensed Fonar’s patents. Total settlements and royalties Extracting value from your existing investments: from enforcement of the Fonar patents totalled over $200 million. We will scour the intellectual property assets within your existing portfolios and identify potential assets that can be

immediately monetized through sale or license. Having achieved billions in returns over two decades of experience monetizing TVI Licensing Campaign: intellectual property portfolios, we have the blueprint to support your most complex monetization efforts. We helped TVI monetize its portfolio of patents related to disc players. We originally approached Microsoft to obtain a license, which it did a week before trial. Following Microsoft’s Identification of strategic IP acquisitions: agreement to take a license, we assisted our client in a Often it becomes necessary to hedge risk for your existing or potential investments by securing defensive intellectual property monetization campaign throughout the consumer electronics plays in the marketplace. We have experience helping clients identify high-value acquisition targets designed to provide a industry. Many manufacturers of disc players have since obtained licenses to the patents. Total monetization of the strong defensive portfolio within specific markets of interest. portfolio to date exceeds $100 million.

Honeywell LCD Technology Monetization: Our firm successfully worked with Honeywell to monetize its patents related to Liquid Crystal Displays. Nearly all of the relevant consumer electronics industry took licenses to the patents with revenue to date exceeding $200 million. intellectual property litigation

Case Studies

Eolas v. Microsoft: Honeywell Auto-Focus Monetization: In one of the largest patent verdicts at the time, we obtained Our firm represented Honeywell in a patent infringement a $520.6 million verdict on behalf of Eolas Technologies action against Minolta involving patents on autofocus Often litigation becomes necessary in order to maximize return on investment of intellectual property assets. We are and the University of California related to web-browser cameras. Following a five-month trial, the jury awarded willing and able to throw rocks—and have the finesse to do so in glass houses if necessary. Unlike many firms, we technologies against Microsoft. Honeywell $96.3 million. Minolta ultimately settled for have the experience of partnering with capital firms to maximize returns along with the reputation of success in the $127.5 million. A subsequent industry-wide licensing courtroom and within industry to drive results in litigation should it become necessary. St. Clair Litigation: campaign resulted in total settlements of over $500 million. We helped St. Clair monetize its investment portfolio of We have litigated patents from a wide range of technology disciplines, including software, semiconductors, computer digital camera patents. We successfully achieved jury AMD v. Samsung: peripherals, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, medical products, telecommunications, and industrial machinery. Our verdicts against three manufactures of digital cameras: Our firm represented AMD in a case alleging that Samsung’s patent infringement trial lawyers include attorneys experienced in a variety of technical disciplines ranging from Sony, Canon and Fuji. Following those verdicts, we defended DRAM, SRAM & NAND memory products, system logic biophysics to electrical engineering. Many of these trial lawyers are registered to practice before the U.S. Patent our client against challenges to its ownership of the patents. products, and consumer products infringed 7 AMD patents and Trademark Office. But, first and foremost, we are trial lawyers who try patent infringement cases, argue Federal After successfully defeating those claims, we proceeded to concerning memory architecture, processor micro-architecture, Circuit appeals, structure and negotiate business resolutions of patent infringement disputes, and counsel clients on conduct a targeted licensing campaign designed to monetize MOS-transistor fabrication and design, and user interface patent matters. Partnering with us gives you a powerful tool in crafting a successful strategy to maximize your return the portfolio. Ultimately, over $240 million in licensing design for consumer products. The case settled shortly before on investment in intellectual property. revenue related to the technology was secured on behalf of trial and is reputed to be the 4th largest patent case settlement our client. and/or verdict from January 2010 – June 2011. strategic business consultation

We know your focus is building a portfolio of successful • Strategies for maximizing long-term value in nascent businesses. Maximizing the value of those investments patent portfolios; often requires early planning to ensure that assets can be leveraged when they mature. Because we have been in the • Techniques for assessing and evaluating offensive and business of turning intellectual property into capital for defensive intellectual property acquisitions; and decades, we know what it takes to ensure those assets can be monetized in the future—as well as the pitfalls that can drive • Strategies for engaging potential licensing targets. down value. We can translate what we know into a blueprint for you and your portfolio companies to follow to construct We will make our team of experienced attorneys, patent and protect value. As a strategic partner, we can provide agents, experts in science, and experts in finance available insight into: to you and your portfolio companies to develop customized, effective strategies to solidify the foundation for your • The policies and procedures each of your portfolio investment success years into the future. companies need in place today in order to protect investments in innovation tomorrow;

• The steps you should take to develop defensive positions against potential adversaries asserting intellectual property portfolios against you; Intellectual Property Litigation Investment

Are you looking to build your investment portfolio We work with our clients to help securitize their without the complications of adding to your list of intellectual property by assisting them in locating portfolio companies? We are looking to partner in funding and partners to share the risk, and potential financing monetization and litigation opportunities reward, of monetization efforts. These opportunities within our existing clients’ portfolios. provide investment firms the ability to distribute monetization risk across multiple technology portfolios Given our reputation of success in monetizing intellectual and monetization campaigns. property holdings, we often receive more contingent opportunities than we are able to fund. Martin R. Lueck Chairman of the Executive Board Architects of Success [email protected]

The building block to a successful monetization campaign is the right team. We have a long Marty has over 25 years of experience driving results for his clients. Among those results history of success when it comes to turning intellectual property into cash or strategic leverage. are billions in monetization on behalf of owners of intellectual property. Examples include recoveries exceeding $200 million for Fonar, a jury verdict of $520 million against Microsoft on behalf of Eolas and the University of California, a verdict of $91 million on behalf of UNOCAL, and over $200 million in licensing revenue for Honeywell related to LCD technology.

Marty is a fellow of both the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers. Marty is admitted to practice in Minnesota and New York. Ronald J. Schutz Chair, National IP Litigation Group; Regional Managing Partner, New York [email protected] Marla R. Butler Assistant Regional Managing Partner, New York; Ron has extensive experience monetizing intellectual property on behalf of his clients. He Chair of Firm’s Diversity Committee has worked with inventors, businesses, and investors to transform their intellectual property [email protected] portfolios into billions of dollars. For over fifteen years, Marla has been assisting clients transform intellectual property Ron’s success also extends into the courtroom. Among his significant jury verdicts are the investments into capital. For example, Marla aided Intergraph in monetizing its patent following: $110 million (Fonar v. GE); $66 million (Grantley v. Clear Channel); $35 million portfolio related to processor technology in excess of $860 million. (St. Clair v. Canon); $25 million (St. Clair v. Sony); and $8 million (Personal Audio v. Apple). Marla is a Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America. Marla is admitted to practice in Ron is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Ron is admitted to practice in Georgia and New York. Minnesota and New York.

Jan M. Conlin Cyrus A. Morton Chair, Business Litigation Group Chair, Patent Office Trials Group [email protected] [email protected]

Jan has a long record of participating in and leading high-stakes intellectual property Cy went from inventor to lawyer. For nearly fifteen years, Cy has represented clients in monetization campaigns. Jan has been involved in multiple nine-figure patent monetization intellectual property disputes. He has a number of trial successes including an $89 million campaigns including a $520.6 million verdict against Microsoft in 2004, a $400 million judgment against Clear Channel, a $12 million judgment against Apple, and a $7.4 million settlement for Pitney Bowes Inc. in a patent dispute against Hewlett-Packard in 2001, and judgment against Itron. Cy is admitted to practice in Minnesota. over $500 million in licensing revenue on behalf of Honeywell.

Jan has been named to BTI’s esteemed “Client Service All-Star Team” four times (2007, 2009, 2011, 2013)—an honor rarely given more than once. Jan is admitted to practice in Minnesota and North Dakota. Improving ROI by Watching the bottom line

We believe in design without compromise. We partner to share risk: We leverage in-house experts in science: We deploy cutting edge analytic tools to monitor We have decades of experience crafting alternative fee When necessary, we support our monetization teams with in- expenses: But we recognize that the cornerstone of any arrangements designed to share the risk of monetization house expertise in various scientific disciplines. Our team of We have developed our innovative OneBudget™ tool to campaign centered on ROI requires meticulous campaigns. These partnerships lower the upfront capital Ph.D.s in computer science, material sciences, engineering, leverage historic analytics to improve predictability in likely necessary to monetize a portfolio while providing you and biological sciences can identify potential licensing monetization expenses and to provide realtime optics into attention to the bottom line. Because we often assurance that maximizing ROI on the portfolio is our top targets; assess validity concerns within a patent portfolio; the campaign’s budget and expenses. have skin in the game, we learned long ago priority. assess technical documentation during litigation discovery; and assist potential infringement and validity experts. By We deliver in-house, industry-leading electronic how to deliver results cost effectively. We We leverage in-house financial experts: leveraging these teams we are able to substantially reduce discovery services: have designed our services to maximize cost- We support our monetization teams with in-house CPAs, costs associated with external scientific experience. When litigation happens, few things blow up the bottom line MBAs and Ph.D.s in economics to provide a wide range of quite like electronic discovery. We have worked to control efficient structure and resources. By doing so, quantitative assessments and analyses for monetization We drive down overhead: these costs for clients by developing a comprehensive in- we can build up ROI without compromising campaigns. In other words, we are able to limit the use We have built our practice around driving down overhead. house electronic discovery group. This group allows us of costly external financial experts in our review and With our home office strategically placed in the Twin Cities to provide start-to-finish electronic discovery services, quality. Here are some of the pillars of our cost- interpretation of financial documents, accounting records we are able to minimize the expense of maintaining large, including cost-efficient review of documents. In turn, we can efficient approach that help make us different: and other electronic discovery; conducting of market expensive, satellite offices. We pass those savings along to our drive down costs for our clients. analysis related to various technologies; calculation of IP clients in the form of competitive billing rates. valuations; and critiquing and supporting damages experts when it becomes necessary. contact

Ronald J. Schutz Partner Chair, National IP Litigation Group; Regional Managing Partner, New York 212.980.7400 [email protected]

601 Lexington Avenue Suite 3400 New York, NY 10022-4611

rkmc.com/ip

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING MATERIAL

This is an attorney advertisement. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Past results are reported to provide the reader with an indication of the type of litigation in which we practice and should not be construed to create an expectation of result in any other case as all cases are dependent upon their own unique fact situation and applicable law. The member of the State Bar of California responsible for this advertisement is Roman M. Silberfeld. Being named to the list or receiving the award is not intended and should not be viewed as comparative to other lawyers or to create an expectation about results that might be achieved in a future matter.

Each listed attorney is admitted to practice law only in the states listed. For additional information about our firm, practices, attorneys, and offices, please visit our website at http://www.rkmc.com. Atlanta | Boston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | Naples | New York rkmc.com/ip