James E. Davis

Representative Commercial Litigation Matters

• Obtained numerous temporary restraining orders and temporary injunctions in Dallas County, Texas, on behalf of client, Texas mortgage broker, against numerous former employees who violated contractual covenants not to compete and misappropriated client’s trade secrets.
• Successfully defended inventor of highly popular toy against multi-million dollar claim for theft of trade secrets filed in the 219th District Court of Collin County, Texas, by an assignee of a competing inventor’s patent rights.  After obtaining a summary judgment in favor of the client on all the plaintiff’s claims, defendant prevailed in a jury trial in November 2018, and obtained a judgment against the plaintiff for attorney’s fees through trial in the amount of $194,970.

• Successfully defended chief executive officer of a publicly traded corporation in Austin, Texas, against claims of securities fraud by an investor.  Notwithstanding a jury verdict in favor of the investor in the amount of $2,500,000, client obtained a judgment notwithstanding the verdict from the 98th Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas, and the investor recovered nothing on its claims.
• Successfully defended chief executive officer of Austin telecommunications company against claim of fraud by investor. After jury trial but before the court received the jury’s verdict, the client was able to negotiate a favorable settlement with the investor, complete with a full release of all claims.
• Successfully represented manufacturer of high-speed postal sorting equipment against claims by independent contractor for tortious interference with contractual relations. After jury trial in Tarrant County, Texas, obtained a directed verdict in favor of client rejecting all the plaintiff’s claims.

• Successfully defended telecommunications equipment manufacturer against employee’s claim of wrongful termination, obtaining a jury verdict in favor of the client in Denton County, Texas.

• After initiating Copyright infringement claims against an NFL franchise for its unauthorized use of a photographer’s iconic photograph of football star, Emmitt Smith, obtained a settlement of $275,000.  Subsequently, the NFL franchise again used the photographic image without the photographer’s permission, which lead to an additional lawsuit and confidential settlement agreement.
• Represented licensee of patent for weight loss formula to assert claims of fraud, business disparagement, tortious interference with contract, and Lanham Act violations against former sub-licensee of patent and to defend patent infringement claims asserted by defendants.  After expedited discovery, substantial briefing, and an evidentiary hearing, defeated the defendants’ emergency motion for temporary injunctive relief.  Pruvit Ventures, Inc. v. Forevergreen International, LLC, 2015 WL 9876952 (E.D. Tex., No.  4:15-CV-571-ALM-CAN, Dec. 23, 2015).  Thereafter, negotiated and obtained a favorable settlement for the client.
• Represented patent owner in numerous patent infringement claims regarding electronic cables and connectors with multi-positional swivel adapters against large distributors and manufacturers of electronic equipment. After preliminary litigation and claim construction proceedings, obtained numerous settlements that resulted in cash payments to client.

• Represented provider of clinical dictation, speech recognition, e-Sign and EHR integration services in connection with claims in arbitration against large medical technology provider for breach of contract. After final hearing before arbitrator but prior to issuance of final award, client compromised and settled its claims and received a substantial cash payment.
• Represented domestic pipeline construction company in connection with claims by a foreign construction company and many of its subsidiaries in an international arbitration.  After the final hearing commenced, but before the entry of a final award by the arbitrator, obtained a favorable settlement for the client resulting in a substantial cash payment and a full release of all the claims against the client. 
• Represented designer and integrator of one of the first vehicle tracking systems based on global positioning satellite technology against software subcontractor in connection with client’s breach of contract claims in arbitration.  After a three-week final arbitration hearing before a three-member panel of arbitrators, obtained a final award in favor of the client that awarded substantial damages to client and rejected the software subcontractor’s counterclaims.
• Successfully defended Caribbean asphalt trader in an international arbitration from a buyer’s claim for over $3,000,000 damages in connection with the client’s alleged breach of a long-term supply contract.  Pursuant to the final arbitration award, which was issued in December 2020, buyer’s net recovery was limited to $47,819.83, exclusive of costs.  After subsequent litigation and a motion to modify the final award, the parties compromised and settled the dispute.
• Successfully contested arbitration award that was unfavorable to client, which was a high speed, fiber optic internet provider.  Client contended the arbitrator exceeded his contractual authority in connection with the issuance of the final award.  After briefing and oral argument on behalf of the client before the 113th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, the court entered an order in September 2019 vacating in substantial part the arbitrator’s final arbitration award.  Thereafter, the client was able to compromise and to settle the dispute with the opposing party.
• Successfully defended foreign manufacturer and seller of wireless communication equipment in an international arbitration against a competitor’s claims of theft of trade secrets, breach of a non-disclosure agreement, Civil RICO, and violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, among others, in connection with a communications infrastructure project in Africa.  The claimant sought damages of over $1,000,000,000.  After several years of arbitration and two, separate, multi-week final hearings, the arbitrator’s final award, which was issued in February 2017, rejected all the Claimant’s claims.