People

Related Capabilities
Technology and Emerging Companies

Dara Kurlancheek is a partner on the Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation team and focuses her practice on complex patent litigation. Dara has served as counsel in multiple jury trials and arbitration hearings. She is also experienced with handling appeals before the Federal Circuit, coordinating joint defenses in multi-defendant litigations, performing due diligence reviews, advising on licensing strategies, negotiating license agreements, and navigating technical contract disputes. She is equally adept at representing both patent owners and accused infringers in intellectual property disputes.

As a registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has technical and legal experience across a wide range of technologies and industries, including electronic banking and payment systems, computer memory systems, customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, complex computer systems and software, website design software, sonar imaging systems, computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing, electronic billing information delivery systems, customer live-chat website features, and video indexing systems.

Dara also has extensive arbitration experience in domestic and international disputes, from arbitrator selection through hearing, award, and enforcement. She has second chaired multiple complex commercial arbitration hearings and conducted direct and cross-examinations of fact and expert witnesses. Her arbitration and mediation experience covers a wide range of issues, including patent licensing disputes, software service contract disputes, and breach of contract claims related to a distributorship agreement.

Full Bio

Credentials

J.D., Franklin Pierce Law Center

B.S., Pennsylvania State University

District of Columbia

New York

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”


Super Lawyers, 2015-2019

Icon close

Close

Recognition

Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”


Super Lawyers, 2015-2019

News

In the News · Source: Bloomberg BNA, Bloomberg Law, The American Lawyer, The Washington Post, World Trademark Review, World Intellectual Property Review, The Deal, The National Law Journal and Financial Times

May 6, 2019
Nationally-recognized intellectual property lawyers Stephen Baskin and Dara Kurlancheek join the firm's Trial and Global Disputes practice group in the Washington, D.C., office

View all

Matters

buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).

Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Airlines, US Airways, and Frontier Airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.

Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.

See more
Icon close

Close

Matters

buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).

Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Airlines, US Airways, and Frontier Airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.

Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.

Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).

Aeritas LLC v. Delta Air Lines Inc. and US Airways. Defended Delta Air Lines and US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. Delta Airlines, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011); Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).

Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).

Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).

Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).

News

In the News · Source: Bloomberg BNA, Bloomberg Law, The American Lawyer, The Washington Post, World Trademark Review, World Intellectual Property Review, The Deal, The National Law Journal and Financial Times

May 6, 2019
Nationally-recognized intellectual property lawyers Stephen Baskin and Dara Kurlancheek join the firm's Trial and Global Disputes practice group in the Washington, D.C., office

View all

Matters

buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).

Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Airlines, US Airways, and Frontier Airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.

Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.

See more
Icon close

Close

Matters

buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).

Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Airlines, US Airways, and Frontier Airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.

Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.

Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).

Aeritas LLC v. Delta Air Lines Inc. and US Airways. Defended Delta Air Lines and US Airways in the District of Delaware. Aeritas LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. Delta Airlines, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00969 (D. Del., filed October 13, 2011); Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).

Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).

Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).

Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).

News

In the News · Source: Bloomberg BNA, Bloomberg Law, The American Lawyer, The Washington Post, World Trademark Review, World Intellectual Property Review, The Deal, The National Law Journal and Financial Times

May 6, 2019
Nationally-recognized intellectual property lawyers Stephen Baskin and Dara Kurlancheek join the firm's Trial and Global Disputes practice group in the Washington, D.C., office

View all

Credentials

J.D., Franklin Pierce Law Center

B.S., Pennsylvania State University

District of Columbia

New York

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”


Super Lawyers, 2015-2019

Icon close

Close

Recognition

Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”


Super Lawyers, 2015-2019