Asim Bhansali has extensive trial and litigation experience in antitrust, intellectual property, and complex commercial matters. His antitrust cases span a range of high-technology, financial, and life-science industries, and have included several of the largest private civil actions in U.S. history. Mr. Bhansali has defended clients in consumer class actions, including alleged violations of California unfair competition laws. His intellectual property cases have included patent and trade-secret actions in the pharmaceutical, computer-software, internet, and semiconductor industries.
Mr. Bhansali is a frequent contributor to legal publications and conferences in antitrust and intellectual property, and has participated in and chaired programs on these areas for the Practicing Law Institute. He also serves on the Executive Committee of the California State Bar’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section.
Cases of Note
Discover v. Visa USA, Inc.: We defended Visa USA, Inc. in one of the largest private civil antitrust matters in U.S. history. Discover sued MasterCard and Visa for alleged antitrust violations, claiming that credit card network rules affected member banks’ ability to issue American Express and Discover cards. The case settled on the eve of trial for billions less than Discover claimed. We also defended Visa in a similar action brought by American Express.
Abbott and Fournier v. Impax Laboratories, Inc.: We represented Impax Laboratories, Inc. against Abbott and the French pharmaceutical company Fournier in a plaintiff-side antitrust case that alleged monopolization in a drug market. We led the trial presentation for all of the plaintiffs, and secured a settlement for Impax midway through the trial.
Apple Inc. v. HTC Corp: We are lead counsel for HTC, a Taiwan-based manufacturer of handheld devices, in its ongoing battle with Apple over smartphone technology. Apple has charged HTC with patent infringement in district court and before the International Trade Commission (ITC). We are also representing HTC as a plaintiff in a separate ITC proceeding in which the company is asserting its own patents against Apple.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company v. Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation: We represented the world’s leading semiconductor foundry, TSMC, against China’s leading semiconductor manufacturer, SMIC, in the largest trade secret misuse case ever tried. SMIC owed its existence to technology stolen from our client, and faced our damages claim of $2 billion, which would have exceeded SMIC's entire market value. The parties produced nearly 18 million pages of documents and conducted 266 days of deposition in the U.S. and in Asia. Following a jury verdict in favor of our client, SMIC agreed to pay $200 million in cash and approximately $130 million of its company stock. Ultimately TSMC's goal was to protect its intellectual property, not shut down its competitor, and so settled for far less than it could have recovered. For foreign companies that market their goods and services in the U.S., this case established that California’s trade secret statute will protect the intellectual property essential to those goods and services, even if the theft occurred in Asia.
Caritas Technologies v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld our successful defense of a $2.2 billion patent infringement claim against Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. The plaintiff had asserted that Comcast’s Digital Voice service infringed on its patents for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology. We obtained a non-infringement judgment in the Eastern District of Texas, which was sustained on appeal.
Purdue Pharma v. Impax Laboratories, Inc.: We defended Impax Laboratories, Inc. against patent claims related to generic oxycodone products. Following the Federal Circuit’s reversal and remand of inequitable conduct findings in an earlier lawsuit brought against another defendant, we brought a revised challenge under the terms of the Federal Circuit’s order. We then secured a settlement that released our client from all past liability, and gave the company a limited license.
Plaintiff v. Content Delivery Service: We defended a start-up content delivery company in a multi-patent lawsuit brought by our client's established competitor. The suit challenged our client's Internet content delivery service. The lawsuit was settled when another company acquired our client for approximately $130 million.
Plaintiff v. Interactive TV Software Provider: We defended patent infringement claims related to interactive television. The case settled on confidential terms following mediation.
Plaintiff v. Resort Group: We represented various defendants in a putative class action asserting RICO, fraud, and contract claims arising from purchases of timeshares in Mexican resorts. The court granted our motion and dismissed the case entirely.
Plaintiffs v. Pharmaceutical Drug Co.: In a multi-district class action, plaintiffs have challenged a drug company's product label under California's unfair competition law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The case is currently pending.
Awards and Honors
- Top 20 Lawyers Under Age 40, Daily Journal, 2008
- Order of the Coif, University of Texas School of Law
- Executive editor, Texas Law Review
- University of Texas School of Law (J.D., with honors, 1996)
- University of Texas at Austin (B.B.A, with high honors, 1993)
- Partner at Smyser, Kaplan & Veselka, LLP
- Munger, Tolles & Olson, LLP
- Hon. Ferdinand F. Fernandez
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1996-1997
- New York