Mr. Acker is a partner in Morrison & Foerster’s San Diego office. He is a former federal prosecutor with extensive trial experience. His practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, including patent, trade secret and related licensing disputes. In the past several years, Mr. Acker tried to verdict four patent cases. These trials led to favorable results for Morrison & Foerster clients, including a jury verdict of patent invalidity, a jury verdict of no willfulness, and a court finding of patent unenforceability based on inequitable conduct. In addition, Mr. Acker has obtained multi-million dollar jury verdicts for firm clients in trials in both state and federal court.

Prior to joining Morrison & Foerster in 1999, Mr. Acker was an Assistant United States Attorney in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Southern District of California. Mr. Acker tried over 45 jury trials as a federal prosecutor. He currently is the head of litigation for the firm’s San Diego office.

Selected examples of Mr. Acker’s client representation include:

• SCO v. Novell, Inc.: Represented Novell in a high-profile trial in the District of Utah in May 2008 regarding Novell’s right to royalty payments from UNIX software licenses granted by SCO. Following trial, the Court granted Novell a multi-million dollar award.
• Veeco Instruments, Inc. v. Asylum Research Corp.: Represented Veeco in a patent infringement action involving atomic force microscope technology. The matter settled on the eve of trial in the Central District of California with a cross license in which Asylum admitted the validity of Veeco’s patents and agreed to an upfront fee and continuing royalty payments.
• Maxwell Technologies, Inc. v. NessCap Co., Ltd.: Represented Maxwell Technologies in a patent infringement action involving ultracapacitor technology. In April 2007, the district court in the Southern District of California entered a preliminary injunction in Maxwell’s favor enjoining NessCap from making, using, selling, or offering to sell its prismatic ultracapacitor products.
• McKesson v. Bridge Medical, Inc.: Defended Bridge Medical in a patent action including the use of bar-code technology in bedside patient identification and verification systems. Following trial in May 2006 in the Eastern District of California, the court found the asserted patent unenforceable based on inequitable conduct during its prosecution. The Federal Circuit affirmed the trial court in McKesson Info. Solutions v. Bridge Medical, Inc. 487 F3.d 897 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
• Nichols Institute Diagnostics, Inc. v. Scantibodies Clinical Laboratory, Inc.: Defended Scantibodies, a San Diego-based manufacturer of diagnostic parathyroid hormone assays, through trial in a patent infringement action brought by Nichols Institute Diagnostics. Following a month-long jury trial in 2005 in the Southern District of California, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Scantibodies finding that the asserted patent was invalid on the grounds of lack of written description, enablement and best mode.
• Wellstat Therapeutics Corp. v. The Regents of the University of California: Defended The Regents of the University of California in patent, licensing and trade secret litigation involving the use of a uridine prodrug to treat various metabolic disorders. The matter settled on the eve of trial in San Diego Superior Court with no payment made by The Regents.
• Oakley v. Target Corporation: Defended Target against allegations of infringement of Oakley’s design patent for sports sunglasses. A favorable settlement was reached prior to trial.
• Caliper Technologies Corp. v. Aclara Biosciences, Inc.: Counsel to a manufacturer of micro fluidic devices in patent litigation filed in the district court in the Northern District of California. The matter was settled prior to trial.
• Pharmingen v. Fujisawa: Defended Fujisawa in trade secret litigation involving the licensing of clones from Japanese developers for the production of antibodies to be used as research tools.
• United States v. Kayoko Kimbara: Defended a post-doctoral researcher charged with allegedly violating the federal Economic Espionage Act by purportedly misappropriating trade secrets involving DNA sequences and related proteins from a research laboratory at Harvard University. The government agreed to a deferred prosecution.
• United States v. John Benjamin: Represents the former treasurer of Peregrine Systems against conspiracy and wire fraud charges arising from the collapse of Peregrine in 2002.
• United States v. Robert Hitt: Defended an employee of a global airplane manufacturer indicted in the District of Columbia for allegedly conspiring to defraud the United States Government with respect to the export of sophisticated machine tools to China. The U.S. District Court granted our motion to dismiss the indictment against that employee on statute of limitations grounds.
• State of California v. United Parcel Service: Defended a global package delivery company charged by the City of San Diego with several crimes for allegedly violating state hazardous material laws. The San Diego Superior Court granted our motion to dismiss the case with prejudice.
• William R. Benz v. Primecare International, Inc.: Represented a former CFO of a large health care provider who was terminated after he discovered and informed company executives of Medicare fraud. Following a two-week jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the jury awarded our client $4.6 million dollars in damages.
• M.R. v. Filenet Corporation: Represented a former software account executive who was wrongfully terminated for challenging his employer’s failure to pay earned commissions and bonuses. Following a month-long jury trial in Los Angeles Superior Court, the jury awarded our client $2.7 million dollars in compensatory damages. The matter was settled for a confidential amount prior to the punitive damages phase of the trial.
• L. Scott Karlin v. Alcatel, S.A.: Defended an international telecommunications company in a class action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California accused of violating SEC Rule 14d-10 by allegedly paying more to insider shareholders than public shareholders during a two-billion dollar tender offer. A favorable settlement was reached two days before trial.

Mr. Acker joined Morrison & Foerster in 1999, and helped establish the San Diego office. Prior to joining Morrison & Foerster, Mr. Acker was an Assistant United States Attorney in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia from 1989 to 1994 where he tried over forty-five jury trials and briefed and argued numerous appeals before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Mr. Acker returned to San Diego in 1994 and became an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of California, where he also tried district court cases and briefed and argued appeals before the Ninth Circuit. In June 1997, Mr. Acker received the Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service from United States Attorney General Janet Reno in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Acker received his B.S. degree in economic analysis and finance from the University of California at Berkeley with honors and Phi Beta Kappa in 1985. He received his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School in 1988, cum laude, where he was an associate editor of the Michigan Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif. Following graduation from law school, Mr. Acker served as a law clerk for the Honorable D. Lowell Jensen in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Mr. Acker is a member of the California State Bar, the District of Columbia Bar, the San Diego Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, and the San Diego County Bar Association.