Robert H. Fischer

Robert H. Fischer


Of Counsel, New York

Robert Fischer has been practicing patent and other intellectual property litigation for over thirty years in a wide variety of technological fields, including computers, semiconductors and biotechnology. He also has an extensive practice in licensing, opinion work and counseling, in complex interferences and in procuring patent protection in software, electronics and other fields. Bob has represented clients in connection with the intellectual property aspects of major corporate transactions, including joint venture formations, refinancings and sales of businesses.

Mr. Fischer is currently an adjunct Professor at Pace University School of Law, where he teaches patent law. He has also served on the Board of Directors of Voices of September 11th, an organization providing support in response to the 9/11 attacks and advocacy for public policy reform pertaining to terrorism. Previously, Bob has served as Chair of the New York Intellectual Property Law Association Financial Industry Committee.

Mr. Fischer was also counsel of record for the American Intellectual Property Law Association (Amicus Curiae) before the U.S. Supreme Court in Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc.

Prior to going to law school, Bob was an engineer at the General Electric Company, Sunnyvale, California, where he was involved in the design of liquid metal fast breeder nuclear reactors.

Case Highlight
Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof
USITC (2015)

Obtained final determination of Section 337 violation on behalf of Johnson Outdoors. The Commission affirmed a prior ruling by Administrative Law Judge Essex that found all three Johnson Outdoors side scan sonar patents, which cover Johnson Outdoors’ highly successful Humminbird® Side Imaging® fishfinders,valid and enforceable.
Representative Matters
  • Leon Stambler v. The Clearing House Association, LLC (E.D. Tex.). Federal Court infringement action involving patents asserted against interbank payments system.
  • Johnson Outdoors, Inc. v. Navico, Inc. (M.D. Ala.). Federal Court infringement action involving patents asserted against side scanning sonar.
  • Whiteserve, LLC v. Computer Packages, Inc. (Fed. Cir. and D. Conn.). Appeal and remand of infringement action involving patents asserted against software for patent maintenance.
  • Rambus v. Int’l Business Machines Corp. (N.D. Cal.). Federal Court interfering patents action involving computer systems.
  • DataTreasury Corp. v. Wells Fargo & Company, et al.(E.D. Texas). Federal court infringement action involving patents asserted against check processing techniques.
  • Amgen Inc. v. Human Genome Sciences, Inc. Patent Office interference involving TSLP receptor.
  • Kargo Global, Inc. v. Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) Federal court trademark infringement action involving Condé Nast’s Cargo Magazine.
  • Helmholtz-Zentrum Fur Infektionsforschung Gmbh., exclusive licensor for Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research Patent Office interference involving epothilone C and epothilone D.
  • Brasseler USA Dental, LLC v. Discus Dental, Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Federal court false advertising case involving comparative ads for diamond dental burs (small drills used in dentistry).
  • Datamize, Inc. v. Fidelity Brokerage Services, et al., (E.D. Texas). Federal court infringement action involving patent asserted against financial industry trading software.
  • Mold-Masters Ltd. v. Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd. (N.D. Ill.). Federal court infringement action involving patent asserted against industrial plastic injection equipment.
  • Techcapital Corp. et al. v. Amoco Corp. (S.D.N.Y.). Breach of license agreements dispute (three in issue) involving ethanol production technology, arbitrated under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association and confirmed in related federal court proceeding.
  • Portel Data Services, Inc. v. Intelidata Corp. (E.D. Va.). Federal court infringement action involving patent asserted against desktop telephones.
  • Loral Fairchild Corp. v. Matsushita Electric, et al. (E.D.N.Y.). Federal court infringement action involving patents asserted against manufacturers and customers for semiconductor charge coupled device chips.
Events / Publications
News & Press