Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP

John P. Fry is a partner in the Technology and Intellectual Property Litigation Practice. He is a former member of the Management Committee, the Chair of the Litigation Department and the Technology and Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group Leader.

Mr. Fry practices primarily in the areas of patent, trademark and copyright infringement, unfair competition and trade secret litigation with a secondary emphasis on the strategic acquisition and management of intellectual property, particularly in the international context, and on complex patent, trademark and copyright license agreements, technology and software development agreements and concept evaluation agreements. He also counsels clients on antitrust issues, particularly in the area of the antitrust implications of intellectual property enforcement and licensing. Mr. Fry’s practice covers a wide variety of industries, including information technology, electronics, electrical distribution, telecommunications, manufacturing and chemical.

Mr. Fry served on the Board of Directors of Big Brothers Big Sisters of Metro Atlanta from 2003 to 2009.  In 2010, Mr. Fry retired as a Captain from the U.S. Navy after 30 years of combined Active and Reserve Service.

Recent Experience

• TQP Development, LLC v. Ticketmaster Entertainment, Inc., et al., (E.D. Tx.) (representing defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. in a patent infringement suit involving data encryption methodologies for data transfer between a customer and a website)
• WIAV Networks, LLC v. 3COM Corporation, et al., (E.D. Tx) (representing defendants ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA), Inc. in a patent infringment suit involving mesh network protocols and roaming protocols in a packet communication network)
• TruSeal Technologies, Inc. v. Beijing Huali Architecture Decoration Co., Ltd., (D. Nv.) (representing Huali in a patent infringement suit involving polymer based sealant systems for insulated glass windows)
• Truseal Technologies Inc v. GGK Distribution LLC et al, (N.D. Tx.) (representing GGK in a patent infringement suit involving polymer based sealant systems for insulated glass windows)
• EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. Skytel Corporation et al., (E.D. Tx.) (representing defendant SmartSynch in a patent suit involving wireless telecommunications protocols and system infrastructure for remote communications and data collection)
• Whetstone Electronics, LLC v. Epson America, Inc. et al., (E.D.Tx.) (represented defendant Founder Electronics in a patent suit involving computer interface cards for printers)
• Wisefame International LTD et al v. FKA Distributing Co. d/b/a HoMedics, (E.D. Mi.) (representing plaintiff Wisefame in a patent suit involving electromechanical control systems for back massage devices)
• Alexsam v. Datastream Card Services, Ltd., (E.D. Tx.) (represented the defendant in a patent infringement suit involving systems for activating and recharging prepaid debit cards and accounts)
• EWI v. PRE Solutions, (E.D. Tx.) (represented the defendant in a patent infringement suit involving delivery of prepaid wireless and other prepaid functionality)
• In the Matter of Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Devices Containing Same, (U.S.I.T.C.) (represented respondent manufacturer in ITC investigation relating to ground fault circuit interrupters, completed 2 week trial in June 2008 and the initial determination is due in September 2008)
• Ricoh Co. Ltd. v. General Plastic Indus. Co., Ltd., (D.N.J.) (represented the defendant in a patent infringement suit involving numerous copier toner bottle patents, obtaining summary judgment of non-infringement on certain claims and highly favorable settlement of remaining claims)
• Leviton Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Zheijiang Dongzheng Elec. Co., Ltd., (D.N.M.) (represented the defendant in a pair of patent infringement suits involving ground fault circuit interrupters; obtaining summary judgment of non-infringement in one case and a Markman ruling in the second in which the Court adopted verbatim our proposed claim construction on over 10 disputed elements, which resulted in a highly favorable settlement)
• EBS Dealing Resources, Ltd. v. Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., (S.D.N.Y.) (represented the defendant in a patent infringement action involving computerized trading systems, obtaining highly favorable settlement for client after Markman ruling)
• Cenzic, Inc. v. S.P.I. Dynamics, Inc., (N.D.G.A. and E.D. Va.) (represented Cenzic in a pair of patent infringement cases that involved methods and systems for testing the vulnerability of networks or websites through fault injections; the cases settled on very favorable terms through a cross license)
• Interface, Inc. et al v. Mannington Mills, Inc., (N.D. Ga.) (represented the defendant in a patent infringement action involving carpet tiles; the case settled on highly favorable terms through a cross license)
• In re Dippin’ Dots, Inc. Patent Litigation, (N.D. Ga.) (represented a group of defendants in a patent infringement suit involving a method of making ice cream; summary judgment order eliminating all liability for the client reported at 249 F. Supp. 2d 1346 (N.D. Ga. 2003); following a two week trial, obtained a jury verdict in favor of client finding the patent in suit invalid, that it had been obtained by fraud on the Patent Office and that the plaintiff had violated the antitrust laws by attempting to enforce the fraudulently obtained patent; summary judgment in favor of defendants on trademark and trade dress claims upheld on appeal at 369 F.3d 1197 (11th Cir. 2004); invalidity, unenforceability and non-infringement affirmed on appeal at 476 F. 3d 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2007))
• Softcard v. VISA USA Inc. and Target Corporation, (N.D. Ga.) (represented the defendants in a patent infringement suit involving Smart Card technology and electronic coupons; obtained a highly favorable Markman ruling and case settled after summary judgment motions were filed)
• University of Texas and M.D. Anderson Cancer Center v. CTI, Inc., et al., (E.D. Tn.) (represented the defendants in a patent infringement suit involving positron emission tomography detector design; obtained summary judgment of non-infringement for the defendants; decision affirmed, 164 Fed. Appx. 982, No. 05-1328 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (per curiam))
• United Parcel Service v. Motive Communications, (AAA Arbitration) (represented UPS in a $6 Million dispute involving the failed development of shipping support software)

Honors and Affiliations

Atlanta Bar Association (Board Member, Former Chair, Intellectual Property Law Section)

Georgia Bar Association (Patent, Trademark and Copyright and Antitrust Law Sections)

American Bar Association (Intellectual Property Law and Antitrust Law Sections)

Federal Circuit Bar Association

American Intellectual Property Law Association

Licensing Executives Society

Listed, Best Lawyers in America for Intellectual Property (2003 — 2012) and Patent Litigation (2003 — 2012)

Listed, Georgia Super Lawyer (2004—2007, 2009—2012)

Named, Georgia Trend’s Legal Elite (2006)

Listed, Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business - as a top lawyer in Intellectual Property (2009-2012)

Selected, Georgia’s Best Lawyers (2009)

Recent News

• 29 MMM Attorneys Named Super Lawyers and Rising Stars February 24th, 2012
• MMM Partners Included in “Best Lawyers in America” September 6th, 2011
• Morris, Manning & Martin Recognized for Excellence by Chambers USA June 14th, 2011
• Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP Attorneys Named 2011 Super Lawyers & Rising Stars February 24th, 2011
• Chinese News Crew Interviews MMM Partners October 6th, 2010

More News...