Aaron A. Myers

(612) 334-5008
Partner
(612) 334-5050 Fax
Aaron.Myers@KutakRock.com

Mr. Myers is a trial lawyer and business counselor, focusing on major commercial disputes and complex IP matters. Often tasked to work on high-profile lawsuits where entire product lines or business units are at stake, Mr. Myers’s litigation teams have secured jury verdicts and other favorable outcomes in venues across the United States. Mr. Myers’s results range from “Top 100 Verdicts” receiving national recognition, to major defensive wins at trial and summary judgment. He is also a frequent speaker and writer on IP and litigation topics.

With modest, small-town roots in South Dakota farm country, Mr. Myers’s approach to the law is rooted in skill, hard work, and common sense. Parties wanting to broker in hyperbole and legal jargon are entreated to seek out well-heeled counsel from another law firm. Clients rely on Mr. Myers for straightforward legal representation, based on a genuine understanding of their business and a vigilant focus on the bottom line. In a profession where lawyers often see little more than the lawsuit and billing opportunities immediately in front of them, Mr. Myers’s goal is to forge long-term partnerships with clients built on a foundation of excellent results, unmatched value, and the shared pursuit of larger business objectives.

A dedicated advocate and trusted advisor, Mr. Myers is valued by clients for his aggressive pursuit of their business objectives in the courtroom and boardroom alike.

As a trial lawyer, Mr. Myers excels at communicating complex legal and technical matters in a compelling and accessible way. Mr. Myers has represented clients—ranging from Fortune 100 corporations, to privately held businesses, to family-owned companies—in high-stakes lawsuits across the United States. His experience includes dozens of patent infringement lawsuits, trade secret litigation, trademark infringement cases, and numerous other matters including breach-of-contract, copyright, false advertising, product liability, and non-compete and non-solicitation cases. Mr. Myers is also an experienced ADR advocate, negotiating successful outcomes in numerous mediations, settlement conferences, and other negotiation settings.

As counselor, Mr. Myers has served as outside litigation manager and advised clients on sophisticated IP matters, ranging from litigation avoidance to IP enforcement and monetization. Mr. Myers specializes in helping clients manage their litigation costs, avoid or exit unnecessary litigation, and formulate IP strategies designed to protect their market share and best position them for growth.

Before joining Kutak Rock, Mr. Myers was a partner at an AmLaw 100 law firm. In his free time, he enjoys live music, hiking Minnesota’s North Shore, and expanding his beloved collection of Red Wing work boots.

Representative Experience:

  • In December 2017, Mr. Myers’s trial team received a jury verdict for Arctic Cat in the District of Minnesota in a patent-litigation suit brought by Bombardier Recreational Products (“BRP”).  BRP alleged that numerous model years of Arctic Cat’s snowmobiles infringed two different BRP patents, each from different patent families, relating to snowmobile frame designs and steering position.  After a three-week trial, the jury returned a verdict finding that both of the asserted patents were invalid on multiple grounds.
  • In June 2016, Mr. Myers’s trial team persuaded a jury in the Southern District of Florida that BRP willfully infringed two Arctic Cat patents covering off-throttle steering for personal watercraft.  The verdict was followed by an award of treble damages and enhanced royalties on future infringing units.  The outcome was recognized on the list of Top 100 Verdicts in the United States for 2016.  In 2017, the Federal Circuit affirmed the validity of the asserted patents and the enhancement of damages for willful infringement, while remanding the case for a new calculation of total damages based upon an interpretation of the patent marking statute.
  • Mr. Myers’s trial team received a complete victory in the Western District of Wisconsin for a defendant accused of patent and trademark infringement in a case relating to HVAC ductwork.  Mr. Myers’s client received summary judgment on the trademark and patent claims, with the court’s order finding the invalidity of the asserted patent.
  • Represented Arctic Cat in a patent infringement case in the District of Minnesota involving multiple patents relating to electronic fuel injection technology for two-stroke engines.  Arctic Cat received a defense victory that included summary judgment rulings on six separate legal grounds.
  • Represented a major national bank in two patent lawsuits relating to electronic systems for providing crop insurance and claim-processing.
  • Represented a major national bank in a Northern District of California lawsuit asserting claims of trademark infringement, false advertising, and other business torts.  The case included an appeal to the Ninth Circuit following a denial of the bank’s preliminary injunction motion, with the Ninth Circuit reversing the district court and remanding the motion. 
  • Represented a major U.S. restaurant company in trademark litigation against a multinational food company in the Northern District of Illinois.  The case related to the branding of products for sale in grocery stores.
  • Represented a major power sports manufacturer in litigation instituted in the International Trade Commission against a foreign competitor in a case involving engine-control technology.
  • Represented a publicly traded Canadian company in federal medical-device litigation involving claims for trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition, and breach of contract.
  • Represented a Minnesota company in contract, trade secret, and patent-related action involving agribusiness and soy-extraction technology.
  • Represented the largest United States manufacturer of storm doors in patent infringement litigation and other IP matters.

Presentations:

  • September 29, 2017. “After TC Heartland: Venue Considerations for Practitioners.” Mr. Myers participated in a panel of distinguished practitioners to discuss the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s TC Heartland decision on the future of patent infringement venue.
  • March 23, 2017. “Talking Turf: Trends, Traps, and Strategic Considerations Relating to Patent Venue.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE discussion patent-litigation venue, the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland case, and strategy concerns relating to venue choices for patent cases. (Minnesota CLE).
  • March 10, 2016. “What we learned.” Mr. Myers moderated a panel of IP practitioners in a discussion of business issues relating to joint infringement law and patent eligibility. (Minnesota CLE).
  • September 24, 2015. “Dealing with the Aftermath of the Akamai, Alice and Nautilus Decisions.” For the 2015 Midwest IP Institute, Mr. Myers moderated a panel of experienced IP lawyers in a discussion of the aftermath of three critical decisions with wide-ranging impacts on patent jurisprudence.
  • April 28, 2015. “IP 2015.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE on expected developments in IP law for 2015.
  • April 15, 2015. “What the Supremes Did, Didn’t, or Should do in Intellectual Property.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE on IP cases pending or decided by the Supreme Court.
  • October 21, 2014. “IP at the Supreme Court.” Mr. Myers presented on Supreme Court IP decisions.
  • September 18, 2014. “Akamai v. Limelight.” At the Midwest IP Institute seminar, Mr. Myers moderated a panel of experienced IP lawyers in a discussion of the Akamai v. Limelight decision impacting joint infringement.
  • April 29, 2014. “A review of Section 101 case law.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE on patent eligibility issues.
  • November 12, 2013. “Defensive and Legislative Strategies for Patent Trolls.” Mr. Myers presented on defensive strategies and legislation relating to non-practicing entities and patent litigation.
  • Tuesday, May 14, 2013. “Patently Relevant: Recent Developments in Patent Litigation.” Mr. Myers sat on a panel that included two federal judges, with panelists discussing the impact of the America Invents Act on patent litigation, the evolving legal standard for willful infringement, and the impact of model e-discovery orders for patent litigation.
  • April 12, 2013. “Why Litigators Make Bad Licensing Deals.” Mr. Myers presented on the topic of licensing deals and licensing pitfalls in the context of patent litigation.
  • December 12, 2012. “Indirect Infringement—Aid and Abet? Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200.” Mr. Myers presented on the law of indirect infringement and the Supreme Court’s landmark Global-Tech Appliances case.
  • April 24, 2012. “Is it Patentable?” Mr. Myers presented a CLE on patent eligibility concerns and business strategies relating to eligibility issues.
  • November 14, 2011. “Navigating Patent Reform.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE discussing patent reform and the evolution of patent law.
  • September 22, 2011. “Divided Infringement: The Enforceability of Patents (or Not) in the Age of Combined Infringement.” At the Midwest IP Institute seminar, Mr. Myers moderated a panel of experienced IP lawyers in a discussion of the issue of joint patent infringement.
  • December 15, 2010. “Design Patents: How to Prove Infringement and Fight Off a Validity Challenge.” Mr. Myers presented a CLE focusing on the benefits of design patents and design patent litigation.
  • November 15, 2010. “Patent Litigation and the Bottom Line: Strategies for the New Economic Reality.” Mr. Myers authored a presentation entitled “Top Ten Ways to Blow Your Patent Litigation Budget.”

Publications:

  • “Top 10 Patent Litigation Results.” September 2018. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter discussing the country’s most prominent or significant patent litigation results for The IP Book (16th ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods: The U.S. Supreme Court Reinvents Patent Litigation Venue.” September 2017. Mr. Myers authored a chapter discussing the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark TC Heartland case and its impact on patent litigation venue for The IP Book (15th ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • “Arctic Cat v. Bombardier Recreational Products.” Intellectual Property Magazine, July 2016. In the article Mr. Myers discusses the jury verdict Arctic Cat received in the Arctic Cat v. BRP trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
  • Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.: Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard of Review for Claim Construction.” September 2015. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter entitled “Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.: Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard of Review for Claim Construction” for The IP Book (13 ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • “Limelight v. Akamai: The U.S. Supreme Court Tackles (Kind of) the Issue of Joint Infringement.” September 2014. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter entitled “Limelight v. Akamai: The U.S. Supreme Court Tackles (Kind of) the Issue of Joint Infringement” for The IP Book (12 ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • “Bowman v. Monsanto: Knowing Beans About the Scope of Patent Rights for Self-Replicating Products.”  September 2013. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter entitled, “Bowman v. Monsanto: Knowing Beans About the Scope of Patent Rights for Self-Replicating Products," for The IP Book (11th ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • “Divided Infringement: A Legal Standard in En Banc Limbo.”  September 2012. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter entitled, “Divided Infringement: A Legal Standard in En Banc Limbo,” for The IP Book (10th ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.
  • “The Enforceability of Patents (or Not) In the Age of Combined Infringement.”  September 2011. Mr. Myers co-authored a chapter entitled, “The Enforceability of Patents (or Not) in the Age of Combined Infringement," for The IP Book (9th ed.), published by the Midwest Intellectual Property Law Institute.