Ryan Dykal

Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP

$ $$$

Grand Boulevard 2555
Kansas City 64108 MO US

Ryan Dykal is a litigation partner who focuses on complex intellectual property cases. He has handled patent, copyright, trade secret, computer fraud, unfair competition, and contractual disputes from pre-suit investigations through trial and appeal.

He regularly represents companies in the telecommunications, medical device, consumer goods, computer hardware, and software spaces.

Ryan is a registered patent attorney and regularly gives CLE lectures on intellectual property and litigation issues. Before law school, he worked for a robotics engineering firm and was a National Merit Scholar at Washington University in St. Louis, where he studied physics.

Representative Matters:

  • Sprint v. Time Warner Cable (D. Kan.) – Represent Sprint in patent infringement action on twelve patents, securing jury verdict of willful infringement and full damages request of $139.5 million. Affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
  • Cerner Corporation v. Visicu, Inc. (W.D. Mo.) – Represent Cerner in patent and trade secret case involving medical devices, obtaining jury verdict of invalidity and non-infringement for all asserted patents and no theft of trade secrets. Affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
  • Sprint v. Comcast (D. Kan.) – Represent Sprint in VoIP patent litigation, obtaining summary judgment of infringement and a privilege waiver, resulting in a settlement of at least $350 million on the eve of trial.
  • Oracle v. Rimini Street (D. Nev.) – Represent Rimini Street in case alleging copyright infringement, computer hacking, breach of contract, interference with prospective economic advantage, unfair competition, trespass to chattels, and unjust enrichment. All non-copyright claims defeated, with copyright infringement determined by jury to be innocent. Cost award to Oracle reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
  • GE Lighting Solutions v. Feit Electric (N.D. Ohio) – Represent Feit Electric in patent litigation involving LED technology, obtaining summary judgment of invalidity on indefiniteness grounds under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
  • Twilio v. TeleSign (N.D. Cal.) – Represent TeleSign in patent infringement action involving internet security products, obtaining invalidity of four patents on 35 U.S.C. § 101 grounds.
  • Cisco v. Sprint (D. Del.) – Represent Sprint in two separate cases, disposing of all claims before trial.
  • SPEX v. DataLocker (C.D. Cal.) – Represent DataLocker in patent infringement action involving encryption technology.
  • Sioux Chief v. Zurn (D. Del.) – Represent Sioux Chief in patent infringement action against Zurn.
  • Flectere v. UPS (E.D. Texas) – Obtain dismissal of case asserting two web technology patents against UPS.
  • Sprint v. Comcast (D. Del.) – Represent Sprint in patent litigation involving fiber optic technology, obtaining full jury verdict in favor of Sprint.
  • Cox v. Sprint (D. Del.) – Represent Sprint in declaratory judgment action involving telephony and on-demand video patents, obtaining favorable settlement on eve of trial.
  • Sprint v. Cable One (D. Kan.) – Represent Sprint in patent infringement action against Cable One.
  • Soteria v. DataLocker (C.D. Cal) – Represent DataLocker in patent infringement case involving secured storage devices.
  • Comcast v. Sprint Communications (D. Del. and E.D. Penn.) – Represent Sprint in patent litigation involving various telecommunications technologies.
  • Light Transformation Technologies v. Feit Electric (E.D. Texas) – Represent Feit Electric in patent litigation involving LED technology.
  • Luminetx Technologies v. AccuVein (W.D. Tenn.) – Represent AccuVein in patent infringement action involving medical imaging technology.
  • Sprint v. Charter (D. Del.) – Represent Sprint in infringement action against Charter.
  • Document Generation v. Cerner (E.D. Mich.) – Represent Cerner in two patent infringement cases relating to electronic medical records.
  • Sprint v. Big River Communications (D. Kan.) – Represent Sprint in patent infringement action involving voice-over-packet technology.
  • Sprint v. Mediacom (D. Del.) – Represent Sprint in infringement action against Mediacom.
  • Geo Foundation v. Feit Electric (M.D. Florida) – Represent Feit Electric in patent litigation involving compact fluorescent lamp technology.
  • Mayo Clinic and Cerner v. Elkin (D. Minn.) – Represent Cerner in intellectual property matter in the District of Minnesota.

Education:

  • J.D., magna cum laude, University of Missouri – Kansas City, 2008
  • B.A., Washington University in Saint Louis, 2003 (Physics)

Bar Admissions:

  • Missouri
  • U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Memberships:

  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Intellectual Property Owners Association
  • Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association

Cost

Rate : $$$$

Contact for details

Rate and write a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Is this your profile?Claim it now.

Make sure your information is up to date.
Grand Boulevard 2555
Kansas City 64108 MO US
Get directions

Lina Stillman

5.0
Broadway 42
New York 10006 NY US
Advertisement