Charlie Jones is a trial lawyer in the Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice Groups in the Dallas Office of Haynes and Boone.
Charlie’s practice focuses on representing clients in multiple industries in intellectual property and commercial litigation in state and federal courts and arbitrations. He also regularly handles contested matters in bankruptcy court. Charlie represents both plaintiffs and defendants in patent and trademark infringement litigation, complex commercial litigation, partnership and close corporation disputes, and lender liability, among other issues. His clients span the high-tech, energy, oil and gas, heavy equipment, professional sports, commercial real estate, marketing and brand management, banking, securities, information technology, retail, and publishing/media industries.
Charlie has significant recent courtroom experience in a variety of venues:
- He helped the National Football League win a Texas Supreme Court ruling in 2020, upholding the summary judgment of a suit claiming the NFL interfered with a fantasy football convention backed by former Dallas Cowboys quarter Tony Romo,
- Charlie won a Texas state court ruling in 2020 for client Tokai Carbon CB, defeating a competitor’s request for a temporary injunction that would have substantially impacted Tokai’s business operations.
- He helped PTS Diagnostics secure a U.S. International Trade Commission final determination in 2020 that two of its patents, related to cholesterol diagnostic products used to screen millions of patients worldwide, had been infringed by a rival diagnostic company.
- Charlie was part of the legal team named “Legal Lions” by Law360 for a rare defense victory in the Eastern District of Texas, where a jury in 2019 returned a verdict in favor of HiCon Co., Ltd,, a South Korean manufacturer sued by a Dallas-based company for alleged patent infringement.
In these and other cases, Charlie has gained critical courtroom experience, including handling direct and cross examinations of fact and expert witnesses and successfully arguing a wide range of discovery, dispositive, and pre-trial motions. In preparing for trial, Charlie has deposed dozens of witnesses, including corporate representatives, named parties, and technical and damages experts. Charlie also has a strong understanding of directing and managing e-discovery and related disputes, including controlling related costs on an up-front basis, in federal and Texas state courts.
Prior to attending law school, Charlie worked for an international pharmaceutical manufacturer providing quality assurance and control in support of the development and manufacture of sterile injectable drugs. Charlie developed a strong working knowledge of chemistry, microbiology and mycology as well as a particular interest in botany while pursuing his undergraduate degree at the University of Texas.
Charlie was selected for inclusion in Texas Super Lawyers Rising Stars, Thomson Reuters, for Intellectual Property Litigation, 2014-2018.
Intellectual Property Litigation
- Represented at trial leading WAN technology company and obtained favorable verdict, including invalidity of an asserted patent.
- Represented at trial leading manufacturer of industrial cooling equipment.
- Obtained favorable settlements on behalf of inventor and manufacturer of smart-meter technology in multi-district patent litigation.
- Defended marketing services and event demonstrations provider in a patent-infringement lawsuit involving method patents directed at client’s key services. Litigation settled on terms favorable to client.
- Representation of regional financial institution again patent-infringement claims related to mobile banking software.
- Representation of defendant in patent infringement case in which the patent holder asserted infringement of patent on laser-related technology.
- Representation of a national retailer in multiple patents suit involving a wide range of technologies.
- Representation of generic drug manufacturers in ANDA litigation with respect to dry compounds for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Commercial and Bankruptcy Litigation
- Twice obtained summary judgment in Texas state court in favor of professional sports league in long running dispute with start-up fantasy sports business.
- Defended seller of luxury condominium units as lead counsel in dispute with purchasers. Following a week-long arbitration, arbitrator entered a take-nothing award in favor of client condominium seller regarding purchasers’ claims for breach of contract, fraud, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
- Represented the owner of a luxury condominium complex pursuing claims for trespass, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of the Texas Theft Liability Act, and fraud by nondisclosure against a former officer of the owner's general partner. Successfully prosecuted all claims and obtained court award in client’s favor in excess of $4.5 million, including exemplary damages. Obtained determination that all awarded damages and fees are non-dischargeable under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
- Defended Debtor's Counsel in post-confirmation litigation. Successfully obtained complete dismissal with prejudice of contract, tort, fraud and malpractice claims alleging more than $70 million in damages in a post-confirmation adversary proceeding while securing more than $2 million in bankruptcy-court sanctions against plaintiffs and plaintiffs' counsel. On appeal, obtained complete reinstatement of bankruptcy-court sanctions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Fifth Circuit following partial reversal by district court.
- Represented oil and gas debtors in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In case of first impression, successfully obtained reversal of the district court's finding that a non-insider creditor's claims could not be recharacterized as equity and affirmation of the bankruptcy court's recharacterization decision.
- Defendant's Judgment Regarding Mineral Rights Dispute - Assisted in obtaining a final judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims for reformation of a deed and declaratory judgment and awarding full amount of attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in defending against those claims.
- Representation of a major U.S. bank in a lender liability lawsuit arising out of the financial collapse of Adelphia Communications Corporation.
- Representation of a regional news magazine in a libel suit resulting in summary judgment in favor of the publication.
- Representation of a commercial real estate agent resulting in a complete summary judgment awarding damages resulting from unpaid commission owed by former owner of an office building.
- Obtained asylum as lead trial counsel following trial for survivor of human rights abuses in pro bono representation.
- “Recent Developments in Design Patents,” presenter, Institute for Law and Technology, 54th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference, November 15, 2016.
- “The Intersection of IPR and Patent Drafting: Tips To Increase Chances of Surviving Validity Challenges,” presenter, Dallas Bar Association – IP Section CLE Meeting, September 25, 2015.
- “Tips on Commonly Overlooked Privilege Issues,” The IP Beacon, October 2012.
- "Keep E-Discovery Costs From Torpedoing a Litigation Budget," Texas Lawyer guest article, November 2011.
J.D., Texas Tech University School of Law, 2008, summa cum laude; Order of the Coif; Board of Editors, Texas Tech Law Review; Phi Delta Phi
B.A., University of Texas at Austin, 1999
Texas Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
View the full version of the October 2021 edition of the IP Beacon. Federal Circuit Tells Patent Office to Limit Scope of Design Patents, Overturning Patent Office Precedent On October 4, 2021, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit told the Patent Office that the way it has been reviewing design patent applications is wrong, and that a design patent claim must be limited to the article of m [...]