CARR & ASSOCIATES
					Intellectual Property Attorneys
			REPRESENTATIVE CLIENTS & MATTERS Our attorneys strive to provide quality services for all of your intellectual property needs at reasonable pricing.  We have enjoyed an excellent reputation for nearly a decade and attorneys in our firm have represented the following clients in developing, creating, obtaining, enforcing and protecting their intellectual property assets:
			AEROVIRONMENT ISR GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS S3/SONIC BLUE CORPORATION APPLE COMPUTERS JUMPIN' BANANA SHAREWEAR INC. CANON CORPORATION JENMAR CORPORATION SILICON IMAGE COMPAQ COMPUTERS LOGITECH SLIPTRACK SYSTEMS HEWLETT-PACKARD CORPORATION LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES SONY CORPORATIONCOR PORATIONCORPORA TION ION SYSTEMS INC. NAPSTER TRILLIUM INTEL REVOLUTION EYEWEAR
				Some of the more notable and successful litigation matters in which our attorneys have been involved include: Windstone Editions v. Albert E. Price Represented owner/manufacturer of copyright on sculptured artwork in suit against seller of infringing "knock-offs". Case settled favorably. Animatics Corporation v. Quicksilver Controls: Represent manufacturer of integrated motor devices at appellate level seeking reversal of finding of infringement.  Case has been fully briefed and argued and is awaiting decision by the Federal Circuit. Revolution Eyewear v. Aspex Eyewear Corporation: Represented patent holder in suit for infringement of patent for mounting of auxiliary eyeglasses to primary lens frame through use of magnets. Summary judgment granted finding  infringement.  Issue of damages still pending. Sliptrack Systems v. Metal-Lite Inc.: Represented patent holder in suit for infringement of patent for “slotted- track” uses in construction industry.   Judgment granted finding   infringement and awarding damages in amount of 7 million dollars. Napster v. A&M Records Inc., et al..: Represented on-line music distributor in defending against of claims of copyright infringement by various music production companies.  Appellate Court over-ruled granting of injunction and District Court thereafter denied summary judgment on request for finding of infringement; the case thereafter settled favorably. Atmel Corporation v. Information Storage Devices Inc.: Represented Information Storage Devices, accused of infringing two patents relating to EEPROM memory cells and one patent covering a charge pump. The court granted our client, ISD, summary judgment of non- infringement on two of the patents; the case thereafter settled favorably. Ion Systems v. Desco Industries: Represented patent holder in suit for infringement of patent on air ionization devices. The matter was resolved when the defendant stipulated to a judgment which included an injunction against its future manufacture and sale of the devices.