---

---

Practice Areas: Intellectual Property; Civil Litigation; Biotechnology; Aerospace Technology; Chemistry; Computers and Software; Internet Law; E-Commerce; Medical Technology; Nanotechnology; Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property

Additional Information: Chicago (Member, Professional Responsibility Committee), Illinois State (Chair, 1996-1997) and American (Member, Sections on: Litigation; Business; Intellectual Property) Bar Associations; American Intellectual Property Law Association (Member, Patent Litigation Committee); Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago (Board Member, 2007; Chair, Patent Litigation Committee, 2005-2007).

Brad Lyerla is a trial lawyer who focuses on patent and trade secret litigation. Mr. Lyerla has been lead counsel in numerous trials and arbitrations, often on behalf of some of the most sophisticated companies in the U.S. He has successfully tried cases for Solo Cup Company, AM International, U.S. Robotics, MCI, The Quaker Oats Company, Business Records Corporation, Loewen International, Classics Entertainment, FutureSource and Monosol, among many others. Mr. Lyerla also has led litigations that ended successfully through summary judgment or negotiated business arrangements for such clients as Hospira, General Electric, Charter Communications, Sara Lee, Ameritech, ChrisCraft Industries, Tenneco, Millennium Information Services, Whitman Corporation, Shopko, General Dynamics, Wolfram Research, Glidewell Laboratories, Pentech Pharmaceuticals, and many more. In addition to his trial work in the intellectual property arena, Mr. Lyerla has tried more than a dozen criminal trials, including the successful defense of two death penalty cases. In a career that has spanned more than 27 years and has included hundreds of trial days, he has had some unique experiences. A few of the highlights include: Mr. Lyerla led the successful defense of the Solo Cup Company in Fort James Company v. Solo Cup Company. Fort James alleged that Solo Cup infringed 3 patents relating to the microstructure of pleats in the rims of paper plates. Fort James sought nearly $100 million, including treble damages and attorneys fees. Flouting recent Federal Circuit opinions rejecting the defense as legally unsound, Mr. Lyerla made the centerpiece of the defense that Solo was merely "practicing the prior art". The Milwaukee, Wisconsin jury was out less than two hours before returning a verdict of non-infringement giving Mr. Lyerla's client a total victory. The jury's verdict was not appealed. Mr. Lyerla took over the defense of MCI in the second day of an emergency injunction trial when his partner could not continue because of the unexpected early arrival of her baby. This trial included an unusual cross examination by Mr. Lyerla. Illinois Bell alleged that MCI's advertising that its rates for local toll phone calls were "always lower" than Bell's was misleading. With no deposition or notes, Mr. Lyerla cross-examined Bell's expert who had testified concerning a consumer survey. By the end of the free-wheeling cross-examination, the expert conceded, among other things, that he could not consistently distinguish between leading and non-leading questions in a consumer survey. When Bell's lawyer did not re-direct the witness, Judge Joan Gottschall of the Federal Court in Chicago told Bell's lawyer to call his "next victim". Mr. Lyerla was one of three lawyers (from 3 different law firms) who represented Ron Katz and MCI in the very unique Markman hearing in RAKTLP and MCI v. AT&T, et al. The hearing in Philadelphia lasted nine full trial days - which included expert testimony and attorney argument. Judge Lowell Reed's opinion exceeded 100 pages and found for Mr. Lyerla's clients on virtually every contested issue. Mr. Lyerla took over the defense of a trade secrets case after prior counsel had lost a preliminary injunction trial. Mr. Lyerla counter-claimed and won a $6.25 million judgment in a bench trial on the counterclaim. The high-point of the trial came when the plaintiff attempted to testify about imaginary conversations that he had envisioned with potential buyers of the business in question. Judge Harry Leinenweber, while laughing out-loud, over-ruled Mr. Lyerla's objection that no foundation for such testimony could be laid 'unless the witness had been on drugs or suffering from a head injury' at the time of the imaginary conversations. The end result was another complete victory for Mr. Lyerla's client. Mr. Lyerla was asked by Quaker Oats to defend Bill Redmond, Quaker's newly-hired VP of Operations, in an emergency injunction trial brought by Pepsi. This case has become the leading case for a trade secrets doctrine known as the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Pepsi, Redmond's former employer, sought to block him from working for Quaker. After an eight day trial (that began only a week after the complaint was filed), the court denied Pepsi's request to prohibit Redmond from working at Quaker, but did restrict Redmond's areas of responsibility for approximately five months. The case is known not only for breaking new ground in trade secrets law, but also for the stories surrounding Mr. Lyerla's cross-examination of Pepsi's CEO, Craig Weatherup. For some of the inside story, see Lyerla, Thirteen Rules for Inevitable Disclosure Trials, The Computer Lawyer, Vol. 15, no. 6, June, 1998. Mr. Lyerla represented Business Records Corporation in a jury trial in Danville, Illinois. BRC contended that its former regional president stole trade secrets and used those trade secrets to gain the business of 16 former BRC customers. However, BRC did not authorize the depositions of the customers before the trial. When 13 of the former customers appeared at the trial and testified against BRC - a nightmarish scenario that Mr. Lyerla had foreseen - he performed radical surgery on his theory in mid-trial and secured a 5 year injunction against the former president and recovered his client's attorneys fees. The case now is a leading case in Illinois regarding the enforcement of non-compete agreements that are ancillary to the sale of a business. Business Records Corporation v. Lueth, 981 F.2d 957 (7th Cir. 1992). Mr. Lyerla was part of a team of lawyers who represented General Dynamics in what is believed to have been the largest ADR mini-trial ever conducted up to that point. The night before the closing arguments, the lead lawyer for GD became too ill to argue the next morning. Mr. Lyerla prepared all night and argued for GD the following day on the critical liability issues. Mr. Lyerla's argument was singled out for praise by his client's Chairman of the Board. The ADR neutral (a retired federal district court judge who presided at the mini-trial) wrote an advisory opinion finding for GD on the key issues and recommending a substantial settlement in GD's favor. The case later settled for a nine figure settlement. Mr. Lyerla represented a seller of paper products in a jury trial in Wheaton, Illinois. When the opposing party argued that it's interpretation of the sales contract at issue precluded liability based on a trade usage, Mr. Lyerla responded that a trade usage is like the argument one hears from a child, "all the other children get to. . . ." The jury of mostly parents found for Mr. Lyerla's client. Mr. Lyerla's philosophy is that to achieve excellence as a counselor and advocate, a lawyer must litigate with joy and enthusiasm not only for his client, but also for the law. Good luck doesn't hurt either. Mr. Lyerla is listed in Who's Who in America, Who's Who in American Law, and Who's Who in the World, and has been named one of America's Leading Lawyers by the American Research Corporation. A recent survey named Mr. Lyerla a "Super Lawyer." A past recipient of the John Powers Crowley Justice Award for his pro bono trial work, Mr. Lyerla is a life fellow of the American Bar Foundation. He is also a member of the Cribbett Society of the University of Illinois College of Law. He was editor in chief of Intellectual Property Litigation from 1990 to 2005 and now serves as editor at large. Mr. Lyerla also is a contributing author to Claim Construction In The Federal Circuit, Manzo, ed., West Legal Works (2005 and 2006). Mr. Lyerla received his B.A. from the University of Illinois in 1976 and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He graduated from the University of Illinois College of Law in 1980 where he received honors and was a member and editor of the law review, 1978-1980.

---

Firm Members: John Labbe Cullen Pendleton Thomas Ross Gergory Chinlund Thomas Duston