Robert R. Brunelli

Shareholder

Contact info

(303) 863-2980
[email protected]
Linkedin

Contact info

(303) 863-2980
[email protected]
Linkedin

Robert Brunelli is an integral part of his clients’ intellectual property management teams. As head of the firm’s litigation practice, Rob has almost three decades of experience counseling early-stage start-ups to multi-national corporations in conducting investigations, trials and appeals and before various courts and government tribunals, as well as extensive experience serving as an expert witness.

Rob thrives on the intellectual challenge each client and each case present, and he “tends to think almost exclusively strategically,” he says. Over the course of his career, Rob has successfully managed and litigated hundreds of complex intellectual property actions in most Federal District Courts in the United States. His practice also includes representations in Federal Courts of Appeal, the International Trade Commission, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the United States Patent Office Board of Appeals and Interferences proceedings. Rob also regularly works as an expert witness in intellectual property, civil litigation, and legal malpractice suits.

Combining his business and legal expertise, Rob covers the full spectrum of transactions and issues facing companies in many technologies and other business sectors. He understands the business challenges and the risks posed by potential and actual lawsuits, and he has the skills and experiences his clients require to realize the best possible outcome, even if that outcome is not one which is most desired by the client.

“I tend to take on my clients’ problems as my own, and I am fully invested in finding a solution for them,” he says. Clients rely on Rob to accurately vacillate between science and law, knowing he will develop a full working knowledge of their technology and issues and provide them with a clear roadmap for their legal disputes.

Rob is AV-Preeminent® peer review rated in accordance with Martindale-Hubbell® certification procedures and has been selected by attorney peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers®, Super Lawyers and Chambers & Partners. Rob is also a founding member of the Colorado Intellectual Property American Inn of Court.

Vermont Law School (J.D., cum laude, Law Review, 1990)
Worcester State College (B.S., Computer Science, cum laude, 1986)

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Intellectual Property in Employment
  • Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Patent Office Post Grant Proceedings
  • Patent Prosecution
  • Business Methods
  • Computer Hardware & Software
  • Electrical Engineering
  • Green Technology
  • Mechanical Engineering

Colorado, 1990
United States District Court, Colorado, 1990
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1990
United States Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit, 1991
United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, 2003
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, 2007
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, 2013
United States Patent and Trademark Office, 1994
United States Supreme Court, 2016

Affiliations:

American Bar Association, 1988
– Patent, Trademark & Copyright Section member
– Litigation Section member
Colorado Intellectual Property American Inn of Court Founding Board Member

Presentations and Publications:

News:

  • Law Week Colorado — Dec. 4, 2017– Robert Brunelli provided his perspective on how much it matters to a jury if one of the parties in a patent infringement lawsuit is a non-practicing entity…read more…
  • SCOTUS ruling places new limits on patent suit locations, May 22, 2017 — Brunelli featured in Law360 article evaluating the Court’s ruling and its potential impact…read more…
  • Denver Business Journal Law Quarterly, Aug. 12, 2016 — Brunelli featured in article highlighting need for policies around use of personal devices at work…read more…
  • Brunelli recognized by Best Lawyers in America 2017…read more…
  • Pharmafile — Jan. 2015 — What does the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Teva v. Sandoz mean for patent cases for other pharmaceutical companies in the US? Rob Brunelli is quoted on the topic in this article …read more…
  • Intellectual Property Magazine — Nov. 2014 — Should factual conclusions made by a district court when examining claim construction be given deference on appeal or should they be reviewed de novo? Robert R Brunelli and David B Kellis examine the issues…read more…
  • Law Week Colorado — Nov. 10, 2014 — Sheridan Ross Co-President Robert Brunelli provides his perspective on the role the economy plays in legal actions by non-practicing entities…read more…
  • Law360, Oct. 10, 2014 — Robert Brunelli was quoted October 10, 2014 in a Law360 article discussing the potential impacts of the Supreme Court case Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc. et al..read more…
  • Best Lawyers in America® 2015, August 19, 2014 — Four attorneys from Sheridan Ross P.C., a Denver-based Intellectual Property law firm, including Rob Brunelli were listed in The Best Lawyers in America® 2015 in the areas of Copyright Law, Trademark Law, IP Litigation and Patent Law…read more…
  • Law360, June 20, 2014 — Robert Brunelli was quoted in an article regarding on Supreme Court’s much anticipated decision in Alice v. CLS Bank…read more…
  • Law360, June 2, 2014 — Sheridan Ross partners Robert Brunelli and Benjamin Lieb are quoted in a roundup story on the significance of two United States Supreme Court rulings in Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc. and Limelight Networks Inc. v. Akamai Technologies Inc. matters…read more…
  • Law360, May 13, 2014 — Robert Brunelli contributed to an article providing reaction to the Supreme Court’s decisions in Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Systems Inc and Octane Fitness LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc., that make it easier for courts to sanction plaintiffs that bring meritless patent infringement lawsuits. According to Brunelli, the opinions change the law significantly…read more…
  • CNET, May 11, 2014 — Robert Brunelli was quoted in an article regarding a patent Amazon won earlier this year that covers a technique for taking photos with a no-fuss background. According to the article, Amazon’s patent raises questions the merits of the US patent system…read more…

Expert Witness Activity

Estes Park Taffy Company, LLC et al. v. The Original Taffy Shop, Inc.; USDC Colorado; engaged to provide rebuttal expert report and trial testimony on trademark and trade dress issues. Expert report provided and case resolved prior to providing oral testimony.

Rossi Ventures, Inc. et al. v. Antonio Pasquini et al. USDC Colorado; non-testifying expert to provide guidance to defendants in matter concerning trademark and unfair competition issues; case settled under confidential terms

PartMiner Worldwide, Inc. v. Siliconexpert Technologies Inc. and Jeffrey J. Williams; USDC Colorado; expert report issued and deposition testimony given regarding violation of trade secret law

Manthei v. Phillips et al.; Boulder County District Court, Colorado; expert summary issued concerning patent litigation negligence issues; case settled shortly thereafter

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Isaac G. Engida, d/b/a I and G Liquors; USDC Colorado; expert declaration issued regarding request for award of attorney’s fees concerning violations of the Anticounterfeiting Consumer Protection Act of 1996

Okuma Nutritionals v. Quest for Life; Non-testifying expert to provide guidance in matter concerning trademark and unfair competition issues

NurseCore Management Services, LLC v. NurseCorps, LLC; El Paso County District Court, Colorado; testifying expert regarding claim of willful trademark infringement; report provided

Air Control Science, Inc. et al. v. Dust Control, Inc. et al.; USDC Colorado; expert regarding federal patent infringement; report provided

Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O’ Lakes, Inc. et al.; USDC Colorado; expert witness regarding federal trademark infringement; deposition given; accepted as Expert Witness and oral testimony presented at July 2007 trial

The Heat Exchange Heating and Air Conditioning, LLC v. The Heat Exchanger Experts, Inc.; Larimer County District Court; expert witness regarding federal and state service mark infringement; no deposition given; report accepted as expert testimony at trial

Santangelo Law Offices, P.C. v. Touchstone Home Health, LLC; American Arbitration Association; review of reasonableness of fees charged in trademark dispute; report provided

Litigation Experience 

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. FNA Group, Inc.; USDC Colorado; counsel for defendant in declaratory judgment action for patent non-infringement; action resolved

FNA Group, Inc. v. Kärcher North America, Inc.; USDC Western District Washington;  Counsel for defendant in action for patent infringement; action resolved

Lumileds LLC v. HY-Tech Diode LLC; USDC Northern District California; Counsel for defendant in declaratory judgment action for patent non-infringement; action dismissed without prejudice

Aqua Lighting Technology Ltd. v. Leslie’s Poolmart, Inc.; USDC Arizona; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; action resolved on favorable terms

Aqua Lighting Technology Ltd. v. Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc.; USDC Eastern District of North Carolina; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Aqua Lighting Technology Ltd. v. Hayward Industries, Inc. and Hayward Pool Products, Inc.; USDC New Jersey; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Arity, LLC v. Allstate Insurance Company et al.; USDC Northern District Illinois; Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Wright & McGill Co. v. Active Outdoors LLC et al.; USDC Colorado; Counsel for plaintiff in action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity of design patent; action resolved on confidential terms

AthenaInvest, Inc. et al. v. Ibex Investors LLC et al.; USDC Colorado; Counsel for plaintiff in action for misappropriation of trade secrets, false advertising, breach of contract, unfair competition, unjust enrichment; action resolved on confidential terms

World Gold Trust Services, LLC v. Goldcoin Developers Group LP; USDC Southern District New York; Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Spyderco, Inc. v. Extreme Instinct LLC; USDC Colorado; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Spyderco, Inc. v. iOffer, Inc.; USDC Northern District California; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Intelligent Designs 2000 Corporation v. CCM Assembly & Manufacturing, Inc.; USDC Colorado; Counsel for plaintiff in action for breach of contract; action resolved on confidential terms

RMH Tech LLC et al. v. PNC Industries, Inc.; USDC Colorado; USDC Connecticut; Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-0543-VAB; Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement; judgment for plaintiff

Melin LLC et al v. Love Your Melon, Inc.; USDC Colorado; Counsel for defendant in action for trademark infringement; action resolved on confidential terms

Spyderco, Inc. v. Kevin Inc.; USDC Maine; Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement, civil conspiracy, commercial disparagement; action resolved on confidential terms

Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC v. Behavioral Recognition Systems, Inc.; (S.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Spyderco, Inc. v. Darriel K. Caston; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

SteelStrike Leather Products, Inc. v. United Leather USA, LLC et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for copyright infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Bosch Security Systems, Inc. et al. v. Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC; (D. Del.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC v. ADT Security Services, Inc. et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genelex Corporation; (W.D. Wash.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genesis Genetics Institute, LLC and Stanley Dickson, Jr.; (E.D. Mich.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Genetics & IVF Institute, Inc.; (E.D. Va.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. PreventionGenetics, LLC; (W.D. Wis.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Reproductive Genetics Institute, Inc.; (N.D. Ill.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Reprogenetics L.L.C.; (D.N.J.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Hydro Engineering, Inc. v. Kärcher North America, Inc.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for defendant in connection with contested subpoena.  Issues resolved under confidential terms.

Miller International, Inc. v. Sidran, Inc. et al.; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trade dress infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Pelco, Inc. v. Criminal Activity Surveillance, LLC; (E.D. Cal.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Qualmark Corporation v. Qualmark Label, Inc. and Kyle Putzier; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Spyderco, Inc. v. Matthew Christensen; (D. Colo.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for trademark infringement and defamation.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. GN Resound A/S et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Sonic Innovations, Inc.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Starkey Laboratories, Inc.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Widex A/S et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Adaptive Sonics LLC v. Cochlear Limited et al.; (E.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. 454 Life Sciences Corporation; (D. Conn.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. Geneseek, Inc.; (N. Deb.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. Steffen et al.; (D.N.J) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of breach of contract, breach of employment agreement, misappropriation of trade secrets. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Kärcher North America, Inc. v. Calvert et al.; (D.N.J.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of breach of contract, breach of employment agreement, misappropriation of trade secrets. Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Genetic Technologies Limited v. American Esoteric Laboratories et al.; (W.D. Tex.) — Counsel for plaintiff in action for claim of patent infringement.  Action successfully resolved under confidential terms.

Patexia, Top 250 Best Performing Attorneys for Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit, 2024
Chambers & Partners USA Guide Leading Individual 2016-2023
Managing IP Stars, 2015-2019
IAM Patent 1000, 2015-2024
Best Lawyers®, 2015-2025
Colorado Super Lawyers, 2010-2023, Top 100 Lawyers 2022-2023
5280 Magazine Top Denver Attorneys, 2015-2022
Martindale-Hubbell® AV Preeminent®  Rating