Benjamin J. Whiting
Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP, 2011-Present, Partner (since 2016)
Confidential Arbitration (Chicago, New York)
Acted as trial counsel for an accounting firm. Obtained a complete defense verdict following a two week arbitration.
UroPep v. Eli Lilly (E.D. Tex., 2016-17)
Trial counsel for UroPep, securing a plaintiff verdict in a patent infringement jury trial concerning Eli Lilly’s sales of Cialis to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The jury determined Eli Lilly infringed UroPep’s patent, rejected all of Eli Lilly’s invalidity defenses, and awarded $20 million in damages. Click here to read more about the trial victory; click here and here to read about the court’s denial of Eli Lilly’s post-trial motions.
Confidential AAA Arbitration (Las Vegas, NV 2014-2015)
Lead trial counsel for slot game manufacturer in breach of contract and fraud suit against former international distributor. Plaintiff alleged our client fraudulently induced a termination of the distributorship agreement and our client counterclaimed for breach of contract damages.
Rolls-Royce v. United Technologies (E.D. Virginia)
Represented United Technologies and its Pratt & Whitney division in an alleged multi-billion dollar patent case brought by Rolls-Royce in the Eastern District of Virginia. The technology at issue related to the jet engines (particularly the fan blades) used on the world’s largest airplane, the Airbus A380, as well as a host of other airplanes. Rolls-Royce sought almost $4 billion in damages and an injunction preventing further sales of the accused engines. The Court granted summary judgment in United Technologies' favor, finding that United Technologies' engines did not infringe the Rolls-Royce patent. This ruling was the culmination of a string of successes in which United Technologies also won summary judgment of no willful infringement (by which Rolls-Royce was seeking treble damages up to over $11 billion) and the Court struck Rolls-Royce’s damages theory. In the ruling precluding Rolls-Royce’s damages theory, the Court found that Rolls-Royce’s multi-billion dollar “price erosion and lost profits damages is based on misstatements of the law, a lack of sound evidence, and unsupported economic assumptions, and its paid up royalty theory is similarly flawed. [Rolls-Royce’s expert’s] report reads more like a lawyer’s brief advocating for the highest conceivable damages award rather than an expert trying to assist the trier of fact reach a reasonable damages figure. Because of this extensive overreaching, the entire report is undermined.”
Stein v. Windsor Energy, et al. (District Court, Goodhue County, Minnesota)
Represented former Minnesota Timberwolves CEO Bob Stein in a case relating to certain silica sand deposits in Goodhue County, Minnesota. Mr. Stein filed the case seeking a declaratory judgment that he still owns half the rights to the silica sand. Mr. Stein also alleged that defendant Windsor Energy (and its related companies) had intentionally interfered with his contract with the landowner. In April 2013, the Court granted Mr. Stein’s request for a declaratory judgment. Then in June 2013, after a week-long trial, a jury found that Windsor Energy had intentionally interfered with Mr. Stein’s contract with the landowner. Should the sand be mined in the future, Mr. Stein will be entitled to his portion of the proceeds.
Confidential AAA Arbitration (New York, N.Y. 2012-13)
Trial counsel for “Big Four” accounting firm in AAA arbitration against former executives of Fortune 100 company. Plaintiffs alleged our client’s tax shelter advice led to hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
Hill-Rom v. Stryker (W.D. Wisconsin, S.D. Indiana (transferred) 2011-Present)
Trial counsel for Stryker in patent infringement litigation involving nine patents relating to two general areas of hospital bed technology. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement for client after prevailing on the construction of all disputed claim terms at the Markman phase of the case. Successfully placed remaining asserted patents into re-examination and won stay of litigation.
- Rolls Royce PLC v. United Technologies Corporation (d/b/a Pratt & Whitney) (2011)