Russell S. Jones Jr.
Shareholder | Litigation Department Chair
Areas of Focus
Class Action Litigation
Corporate Directors & Officers Liability Litigation
Financial Regulatory Enforcement
Financial and Securities Litigation
Intellectual Property & Technology Litigation
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Mergers and Acquisitions Litigation
Trade Secrets Litigation
Trademark and Copyright Litigation
, Duke University School of Law
Order of the Coif
Duke Law Journal,
Editorial Board Member
, Yale University
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 S. Jones, Jr. serves as chairman of the firm's Commercial Litigation practice group. With more than 30 years of practice, he serves industries including telecommunications; software and technology; local and state government; corporate directors and officers; franchisors; banks and financial services; utilities; sports licensors; professionals (lawyers and accountants); not-for-profit entities; and product manufacturers.
Russ handles trials, appeals and alternative dispute-resolution proceedings in the area of business litigation including trademarks, patents, copyrights and other intellectual property; class actions; securities; directors and officers liability; business torts; civil rights; communications; and antitrust. He has represented business clients in Missouri and other various state and federal trial and appellate courts throughout the United States.
Russ has handled more than three dozen class action cases in the areas of consumer fraud, securities, taxation, contract, local government and antitrust. He has served as lead enforcement counsel for a major sports licensor and has handled trademark, copyright and patent infringement cases for small and large businesses.
Selected as an MVP by
, in Client Service All-Stars, Commercial Litigation, 2017
Local Litigation Star recognition by
, 2010, 2013, 2017
Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business,
Litigation: General Commercial (Kansas City & Surrounds), 2012-2017
as a Client Service All-Star, Commercial Litigation, 2016
Selected for inclusion in
The Best Lawyers in America
in the fields of:
Commercial Litigation, 2005-2016, 2018
Litigation - Antitrust, 2005-2016, 2018
Litigation - Intellectual Property, 2005-2016, 2018
Litigation - Patent, 2005-2016, 2018
Selected for inclusion in
Missouri and Kansas Super Lawyers
Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association
Board of Directors, 2009-2015
Lawyers Association of Kansas City
Sports and Entertainment Law Committee Chair, 2002-2004
American Bar Association
Section of Litigation and Intellectual Property Litigation Sub-Section
Defense Research Institute (DRI)
Commercial Litigation Committee
Steering Committee Member
Intellectual Property Litigation Special Litigation Group, Steering Committee
United Methodist Church of the Resurrection, Member
Staff-Parish Relations Committee, Member, 2001-2005
Staff-Parish Relations Committee, Chair, 2004-2005
Board of Trustees, 2009-2011
Wildwood Outdoor Education Center
Board of Directors, 1997-2002
Board President, 2001-2002
Lead counsel defending $50 million TCPA action against financial services client. Obtained summary judgment on vicarious liability theories.
Lead counsel defending patent infringement action against banking software provider. Obtained stay of district court case in favor of covered business methods review proceeding in PTAB, which invalidated the claims asserted against the client based on 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103.
Lead counsel defending patent infringement action against publicly-traded banking software corporation in the District of Delaware. After briefing and argument, the Court entered summary judgment in favor of the client, finding all asserted claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. §101 and not infringed. The Federal Circuit affirmed.
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, obtained summary judgment because 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 patent infringement jury trial in federal court in New York, 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.
Successfully defended a national telecom carrier against a class action brought in state court alleging breach of contract and torts involving the calculation of late charges on unpaid bills. The case was removed to federal court, which stayed it pending arbitration per the customer's contract with the carrier. Instead of arbitrating, plaintiffs dismissed the action.
Consumers brought class actions alleging contract breaches arising out of service-quality issues. 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 our client 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.
Realtime LLC 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. The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment in favor of our client.
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.
TCPA: New Ruling May Invalidate Your Existing Consumer Consents
July 27, 2015
Polsinelli Defeats “Patent Troll”, Wins Summary Judgment in Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.
Mar 13, 2015
What Your Company Needs to Know about Automatic Prerecorded Messages Sent to Clients
March 9, 2015
Named in a TCPA Lawsuit? Liability Strategy May Avoid Crippling Damages
March 9, 2015
The TCPA: Dial in For Compliance in 2015
January 22, 2015
Anna Nicole Smith Revisited: Supreme Court Closes Gap on “Stern Claims"; Declines to Clarify Jurisdiction for Certain Bankruptcy Litigation Claims
June 12, 2014
What’s More Appealing Than Property Taxes? Recent Kansas Legislative Changes Make This Year An Opportune Time to Appeal Yours
June 9, 2014
Respond with Caution! Responses to Discovery "Subject to the Stated Objections" May Waive Your Client's Objections
May 9, 2014
Delaware Program Struck Down: Independent Legal Counsel Still Best Avenue for Private Arbitration
April 2, 2014
Cyber Security: Are You At Risk?
February 13, 2014
Awards & Recognition
Three Polsinelli Attorneys Named 2017 BTI Client Service All-Stars for Superior Client Service
February 8, 2017
Benchmark Litigation Recognizes 22 Polsinelli Attorneys, Reflecting Firm’s Commitment to Litigation Excellence
November 1, 2016
Polsinelli Recognized as Commercial Litigation “Powerhouse” by General Counsel
September 20, 2016
Polsinelli Obtains $1 Million Fee Award for Client in “Patent Troll” Case
April 1, 2016
Polsinelli Ranked in Top Five Percent Of National Law Firms for Superior Client Service
February 9, 2016
Grow to CEO - Gaining the Edge
March 31, 2017
The TCPA: Dial In For Compliance
January 22, 2015
© Polsinelli PC, Polsinelli LLP in California
All Rights Reserved