Nathan C. Brunette
Experience
Nathan Brunette is a partner in the Technology and Intellectual Property practice
group. He focuses his practice on patent and intellectual property litigation as well as
complex business disputes. He has represented clients in state and federal courts,
private arbitration, and Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy proceedings.
His experience includes litigating patent, trademark, trade
dress, licensing, cybersquatting, trade secret, civil antitrust, and commercial matters.
In addition, he counsels clients about the protection, enforcement, and monetization
of technology and intellectual property assets in the context of business opportunities
and transactions.
Prior to joining Stoel Rives, Nathan clerked for the Honorable Timothy Dyk of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and for the Honorable Deborah Chasanow of
the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
Representative Work
Patent Litigation

Portland, OR
(503) 294-9678 direct
(503) 220-2480 fax
Represented medical device manufacturer in a patent infringement action. After
the court dismissed the case with leave to amend and expedited expert
discovery, our team successfully defeated a motion for preliminary injunction
seeking to halt all sales of the accused product and won a stay of the litigation
pending reexamination. The case subsequently settled.

Partner
nathan.brunette@stoel.com
Education

J.D., 2006, magna cum laude
Obtained permanent injunction and judgment on multiple counts of patent
Order of the Coif
infringement, validity, and enforceability in a case involving claims for patent
Dean's List
infringement, tortious interference, and unfair competition against an infringing
Managing Editor, State and Local Tax
Lawyer
competitor in the public safety space.

Represented a patent licensing business in amicus curiae brief supporting

Phi Beta Kappa
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Rehearing en banc was granted,
and the original panel decision was reversed. Reports credited our team's brief as
Dean's List
Captain and Secretary, Mock Trial
the catalyst for the court's decision to rehear the case.
Team
Represented electronics company against patent infringement claims brought by
Steering Committee Member, John
Carroll Scholars Honors Program
a non-practicing entity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
resulting in a negotiated settlement.

Georgetown University, B.S., 2003,
magna cum laude
rehearing en banc in a case involving the scope of intervening rights before the

Georgetown University Law Center,
Admissions
Represented designer and manufacturer of recycling handling systems sold

Oregon
worldwide, in a series of three patent infringement and declaratory judgment

U.S. District Court for the District of
cases in the Middle District of Tennessee and the Western District of Washington.
The court granted our team's motion to dismiss declaratory judgment claims for
lack of personal jurisdiction in Tennessee, and our motion for costs. Our motion
Oregon

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth,
Ninth, and Federal Circuits
Nathan C. Brunette
to dismiss a patent infringement action in Tennessee was pending when the parties settled the dispute.

Represented commercial property management company in defending patent infringement claims brought by a non-practicing
entity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, resulting in a negotiated settlement.
Trademark and Intellectual Property Litigation

Represented branded supplier of over-the-counter drugs in a series of trademark disputes involving third parties using and
attempting to register a variety of confusingly similar marks, including through demand letters, U.S. District Court litigation, an
opposition proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeals Board, and settlement
negotiations. Most of the infringing parties agreed to cease infringement without litigation.

Obtained preliminary and permanent injunctive relief for insurance company in trademark and cybersquatting litigation against
unauthorized seller of merchandise bearing the company’s name and newly launched updated logo. Our team filed litigation in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, resulting in a settlement, permanent injunction, and transfer of the offending
domain name.

Represented emergency medical equipment manufacturer as part of litigation team asserting and defending competing Lanham
Act false advertising claims against a direct competitor. The parties ultimately resolved their dispute through a confidential
settlement.

Obtained preliminary injunctive relief for Troy Healthcare LLC in a trademark and trade dress infringement case brought against
Troy's former distributor, Nutraceutical Corporation, in the Western District of Washington. Our team acted swiftly to obtain an
injunction against the defendant's use of the mark DROPAIN and trade dress confusingly similar to that used with Troy's
STOPAIN® topical analgesic products, and requiring a recall of products from resellers nationwide. The case ultimately settle d.

Represented Harry and David in a series of disputes asserting that competitors' use of Harry and David's trademarks in internet
search engine keyword advertising constituted trademark infringement. Results: Most cases settled.

Represented a nationally recognized manufacturing and technology company in a Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
arbitration proceeding against a cybersquatting former distributor, resulting in transfer of the domain name registration to our
client.
Professional Honors and Activities

Intellectual Property Owners Association Standing Committee on Discovery, 2012-2013

Member, Oregon State Bar sections on Intellectual Property; Litigation; and Antitrust, Trade Regulation, and Unfair Business
Practices
Presentations

Oregon Civil Litigation Training: Depositions, Oregon State Bar, 2015

"Patent Litigation" Guest Lectures, Lewis & Clark Law School, Patent Prosecution course, 2011-2013, 2015

Mayo v. Prometheus - Sections 101 and 103," Stoel University, 2012
Nathan C. Brunette

Former Federal Circuit Law Clerks' Case Briefing and Oral Advocacy Tips (courtroom presentation immediately preceding U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit oral arguments in Portland, Oregon), 2011

"Indirect Patent Infringement," Stoel University, 2011

"Patent Law Year (2010) in Review," Oregon State Bar, 2011

"Patent Law Year (2009) in Review," Oregon State Bar, 2010
Publications

"Apportionment of Intellectual Property Value: Where Economic Theory Meets Legal Practice" (coauthors Brian C. Park and Drew
Voth), The Federal Lawyer, National Federal Bar Association, Oct./Nov. 2013

"The America Invents Act Ushers in Changes to Patent Litigation" (coauthor, Brian C. Park), The Federal Bar Association News,
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Winter 2011

"Shoosmith Bros v. Chesterfield County: When Property Tax Valuation Dumps Unexpected Burdens on Local Land Use Controls,"
The State and Local Tax Lawyer, 2005
Civic Activities

Board Member and Chair of Technology Committee, Friends of the Multnomah County Library, 2011-2014