• PDF
  • vcard
D 816.374.0532
F 816.374.0509
  • Education
    • J.D., Duke University School of Law, 1980, Order of the Coif; The Duke Law Journal, Editorial Board Member
    • B.A., cum laude, Yale University, 1977
  • Court Admissions
    • U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, 1980
    • United States Supreme Court, 1986
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1986
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit,
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 1994
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 1996
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, 2000
    • U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, 1997
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, 2003
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 2008
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, 2009
    • U.S. District Court, District of Colorado, 2003
Russell Jones protects business clients from claims based on patent infringement, class actions, contracts and business torts. A veteran of state and federal courts and alternative dispute resolution forums across the United States, Russ uses a deep understanding of substantive law and cutting-edge procedural techniques to serve clients in industries as varied as telecommunications, financial services, licensing, manufacturing, and consumer products.
  • Lead trial counsel defending patent infringement action against national trucking company in the District of Delaware. The plaintiff alleged that the client's system for determining fuel taxes infringed on its patent. After a seven day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict finding no infringement.
  • Represented a Fortune 100 corporation in an action seeking more than $10 million in damages for alleged breach of an indemnity agreement. After discovery, we moved for summary judgment, which the Court granted because it agreed that the contract did not cover the actions on which the plaintiff based its claim for indemnity, and because the plaintiff’s conduct amounted to the unlawful sale of securities.
  • After a nine-day jury trial, obtained a jury verdict finding that our client did not infringe and that all asserted patent claims were invalid. The Federal Circuit affirmed the result three days after oral argument.
  • A former customer of a national telecom carrier sued in state court alleging breach of contract and torts involving the calculation of late charges on unpaid bills. We removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss or stay pending arbitration per the customer's contract with the carrier. The court agreed, stayed the action, and ordered arbitration. Instead, plaintiff dismissed the action.
  • Consumers brought class actions alleging contract breaches arising out of service-quality issues. We defeated class certification in most cases, and all cases were resolved on favorable terms or dismissed.
  • The Kansas Public Employees Retirement System sued law firms that represented KPERS' investment advisers when investments failed, alleging a duty to protect KPERS from imprudent investments. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of one law firm, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the law firms did not owe KPERS a duty to ensure that investments were safe.
  • Several patent owners have sued banks in Texas alleging that some of their electronic banking products infringe patents. On behalf of the provider of those products, we defended the banks and obtained either a dismissal or a favorable settlement.
  • Realtime sued more than two dozen data providers and financial exchanges, alleging that data compression technology infringed patents. We obtained a mandamus order from the Federal Circuit requiring transfer from the Eastern District of Texas to the Southern District of New York, which after discovery and claim construction entered summary judgment in our client's favor.
  • Our client used a manufacturer in China to make electronic goods designed by our client. The Chinese manufacturer stole the client's designs and offered to sell counterfeit goods on the Internet and to distributors in the United States. A federal court enjoined the Chinese company and its principals from making or seeking to import such goods into the United States, and ordered the Customs Service to prevent infringing goods from entering the country.
  • Plaintiff sued a local public utility, alleging that its electronic billing and payment system infringed plaintiff's patents. We defended the action and after the Federal Circuit affirmed a favorable claim construction that defeated plaintiff's claims of infringement, plaintiff dismissed the case against our client.
  • Represented a professional sports players association enforcing its members' publicity rights against unauthorized users of names and likenesses on games, memorabilia and consumer products. Involved in two ground-breaking decisions on the balancing of publicity rights and First Amendment rights in federal courts of appeals.
  • The states of Kansas and Missouri sued major producers and distributors of natural gas for price fixing of gas produced from gas fields in Wyoming. After years of litigation including proceedings in the U.S. Supreme Court, we went to trial in the District of Kansas. After a week of trial, all defendants agreed to settle for more than $400 million, one of the largest antitrust settlements at that time.
  • After the FCC rejected a proposed merger of two telecom companies, shareholders sued the officers and directors of one company, alleging that stock options that vested upon shareholder approval of the deal breached fiduciary duties to the shareholders. Defendants submitted the matter to a special litigation committee over plaintiffs' oppositions. Through extensive mediation, the claims were settled for a fraction of the amount claimed.
  • Defended director of publicly-traded restaurant group against breach of fiduciary duty claims brought by bankruptcy trustee. After extensive proceedings and briefing on the business judgment rule, a favorable settlement was reached which involved no payment by our client.
  • Owner of patents on LED vehicle lights sued our client, a major maker of vehicle lighting products, alleging infringement. After an attack on the validity of the patents that put plaintiff's licensing program at risk, plaintiff dismissed the case two weeks before trial without any payment by our client.
  • Maker of green chewable teeth-cleaning products for dogs sued our client for making and selling a product that looked similar. After substantial litigation, including the use of trade dress survey experts, the case was favorably settled just before trial.
  • A car buyer in Ohio sued our client, a credit life insurance company, alleging that the insurer improperly failed to refund unearned premiums to plaintiff and a class of similarly situated persons. After discovery and briefing on the class action issues, the district court denied class certification. Plaintiff dismissed the action in its entirety.