“Morgan Fitch taught us the importance of encouraging our clients to want to know why. Instilling a thirst for innovation into our own lives and into our clients is what makes Fitch Even a special place.”
One Lafayette Centre|
1120 20th Street, NW
Suite 750 South
Washington, D.C. 20036VCard
Edward W. Gray’s clients comprise multinational corporations of all sizes, leading trade associations, and non-profit corporations including health insurance carriers, large membership organizations and various colleges and universities. His practice focuses on intellectual property evaluation and strategy, trade secret programs, corporate technology management, licensing, patent strategy, trademark prosecution, and bet-the-company IP litigation.
Clients have a high regard for Ed’s knowledge of business transactions, sales, manufacturing, and government contract matters. His extensive experience includes practice in the private sector, various in-house positions (including vice-president roles at R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company and Federal-Mogul), and government service (including the Senior Executive Service at the U.S. General Accounting Office for the President's Commission on Executive Exchange).
During the last few years, Ed has focused on nationwide litigation concerning the misappropriation of software, data, and computer-related intellectual property and know-how. His approach involves simplifying and leveraging the work of technical, commercial, and financial experts so that their complex and highly technical testimony can be understood and properly evaluated by juries and judges.
Ed has good relationships with prominent experts around the nation, an important factor in timely resolution of complex and difficult IP claims. In addition to his pursuit of civil claims arising from computer and software infringements, Ed regularly works with officials from law enforcement (e.g., the Justice Department and various United States Attorneys offices) with respect to the intersection and frequent overlap of civil and criminal IP issues in computer, software, and data crimes.
Clients often turn to Ed in contested matters based on his willingness to go to trial when necessary. Accordingly, he first seeks to understand his clients’ objectives, using the law as a tool to serve their business and budget needs efficiently and effectively.
In 2011, Ed was inducted into the National Bar Association's Hall of Fame, recognized for his professional achievements and his significant contributions to the community and to the cause of justice during his more than 40 years in the practice of law.
PC Specialists, Inc. v. Micros Systems, Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2010). Represented Plaintiff in a trademark infringement action involving a disputed trademark license agreement. Favorable settlement reached in 2012 in which the parties entered into a joint marketing and services agreement.
TIG Global, Inc. v. PC Specialists, Inc. (D. Colo. 2010). Represented Defendant in an allegedly improper termination of a disputed trademark license agreement. Favorable settlement reached in 2012 in which the parties entered into a joint marketing and services agreement.
American University v. American Financial & Automotive Services, Inc. (TTAB 2011). Represented Plaintiff, a university located in Washington, D.C., in enforcement of its over 100-year-old trademark in an opposition. Favorable settlement reached.
American University v. Anglo-americka vysoka skola o.p.s. (TTAB 2011). Represented Plaintiff in enforcement of its trademark in an opposition. Default judgment entered against Defendant.
American University v. AIU Educational Heritage, LLC (TTAB 2008). Represented Plaintiff in enforcement of its trademark in an opposition. Favorable settlement reached.
Bridgetree, Inc., et al. v. Red F Marketing LLC, et al. (W.D.N.C 2010). Represented Plaintiff in seeking redress for Defendants’ data theft, trade secret misappropriation, unlawful access to Plaintiff’s computers and unfair competition. After two and one-half years of litigation and two-week trial, Jury awarded $4.2 million verdict in favor of Plaintiff.
Shon Brooks v. BET Networks, et al. (S.D. Cal. 2009). California trademark case. Favorably settled for BET, who then continued to use disputed trademark.
The Washington Trust Company, of Westerly v. Washington Trust Bank (TTAB 2009). Favorably settled by parties with a mutually agreed national division in the use each party’s trademark.
Jericho Systems Corporation v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. (Dallas County Dist. Ct., Tex. 2006). Computer trade secret theft claimed by Plaintiff. Favorably settled as part of resolution of related Virginia litigation.
Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. v. Jericho Systems Corporation (E.D. Va. 2007). Declaratory judgment action denying computer trade secret theft claimed by Defendant. Favorably settled for Plaintiff as part of resolution of related Texas litigation.
deCODE genetics, Inc., et al. v. Hákonarson et al. (E.D. Pa. 2006). Favorably settled Plaintiff’s claims of theft of trade secrets regarding genetic research procedures.
Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Nextel Communications, Inc. (D. Del. 2003). Favorable settlement of declaratory judgment action by Verizon Wireless in trademark and trade secret case obtained for Nextel. The settlement in which Verizon dropped its opposition to a spectrum purchase by Nextel paved the way for Nextel’s acquisition by Sprint.