Chris Young

Attorney

Phone: 612.355.4100
Fax: 612.355.4101
Email: young@parkerdk.com
Address: 888 Colwell Building
123 Third Street North
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401

Professional Experience

  • Joined Parker Daniels Kibort in 2020
  • Previously practiced complex litigation at multiple AmLaw 100 law firms and some of the largest Twin Cities-based law firms.

Areas of Practice

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Patent Litigation
  • Trade Secret Litigation
  • Trademark Litigation
  • Product Liability Litigation
  • International Trade Commission Litigation
  • Privacy and Cybersecurity Law

Courts Admitted

  • Supreme Court of Minnesota
  • United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Education

  • Buena Vista University: B.A. in Management and Entrepreneurship (magna cum laude) — 1995
  • University of Iowa College of Law: J.D. (with Distinction) — 1998
  • Mitchell Hamline School of Law: Cybersecurity and Privacy Law Certificate — 2019

Representative Cases

  • In the Matter of Certain Formatted Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridge Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-931, Int’l Trade Comm’n.  Represented fifteen-person Twin Cities-based corporate petitioner in ITC patent infringement investigation regarding the formatting of magnetic data storage tape.  Respondents included multiple Fortune 100 companies that were represented by three large firms ranked highly in the Am Law 100.  Led all fact and expert discovery efforts, including efforts regarding claim construction, infringement, and validity contentions. Settled on favorable confidential terms before hearing.
  • Cell Culture Innovator v. Cell Culture Device Manufacturer, D. Minn.  Represented twelve-person Twin Cities-based corporate plaintiff in misappropriation of trade secret and breach of contract action against Fortune 300 cell culture device manufacturer.  Managing counsel for fact and e-discovery efforts.  Drafted, responded to, and argued numerous non-dispositive motions, prevailing (in substance) on all.  Led expert discovery effort, with a particular focus on damages.  Argued and defeated the defendant’s dispositive Daubert motion relating to damages expert, in the process convincing the court to allow plaintiffs to present damages case including revenues and profits from the sale of convoyed products and future damages for products based on plaintiffs’ trade secrets.  Prompted defendant to replace its lead counsel approximately 4½ years into the litigation.
  • Cotton Farmers v. Herbicide Manufacturer, Clay County, Arkansas.  Represented Twin Cities-based defendant in first-of-its-kind products liability suit alleging damages to cotton crops from the alleged drift of nearby herbicide applications.  Along with co-defendants, obtained a complete defense verdict after a six-week jury trial in plaintiff-friendly Clay County, Arkansas (the heart of Arkansas’ cotton farming region).
  • Dental Products Developer v. Dental Products Manufacturer, D. Minn.  Represented dental product developer against infringing dental products manufacturer.  Convinced court to exclude the defendant’s expert opinion on damages.  Obtained plaintiff’s verdict and damages award of more than twice the amount requested.
  • Smart Card Patent Holder v. Smart Card Manufacturer., D. Minn.  Represented defendant smart card manufacturer in patent infringement suit.  Obtained a favorable settlement of patent infringement allegations.
  • Software Licensee v. Software Provider, N.D. Ill.  Represented licensee of options trading software in a dispute over critical backroom software license.  Obtained favorable settlement after prevailing on expedited motion practice in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • Spinal Fusion Method Patent Holder v. Spinal Fusion Implant Manufacturer, W.D. Tenn.  Represented accused infringer in patent litigation regarding methods for implanting spinal implants.  Obtained favorable settlement.
  • Power Meter Manufacturer. v. Electrical Power Company., AAA Arbitration. Represented power meter manufacturer in breach of contract action; obtained favorable settlement.

Representative Clients

  • Technology Incubators
  • Trademark Holders
  • Manufacturing Companies
  • Agricultural Cooperatives
  • Health and Dental Care
  • Agricultural Cooperatives
  • Manufacturing Companies