Jumio, FaceTec liveness IP legal tussle accelerates with new motion

There is new sauce on the ongoing legal beef between Jumio and FaceTec over a patent for liveness detection technology.

Having already had Jumio’s original legal counsel, Perkins Coie LLP, disqualified, FaceTec filed a motion to have its replacement disqualified, too.

But Jumio is arguing to a California court that there’s no reason to disqualify law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP, because they really didn’t have much to do with Perkins Coie.

Perkins was disqualified earlier in the year for having previously worked with and represented FaceTec in matters “substantially related” to the litigation. In effect, FaceTec says the firm communicated confidential information about its biometric technology to Jumio; specifically, patents covering FaceTec’s flagship biometric liveness detection product, ZoOm. It now says that Morrison & Foerster LLP, which had some overlap with Perkins, should not be able to access documents prepared by Perkins, and that it should also be disqualified, to boot.

Jumio disagrees.

“FaceTec’s motion depends on the fundamentally incorrect assertion that the disqualification of one firm raises an ‘irrebuttable presumption’ that its co-counsel must be disqualified,” says Jumio’s motion to dismiss the request. “But courts in this district have repeatedly held that the disqualification of one firm does not automatically compel the disqualification of co-counsel, particularly where, as here, co-counsel had no contact with any lawyer at the disqualified firm who possessed the adversary’s confidential information.”

Furthermore, “Morrison has been representing Jumio in disputes with FaceTec relating to the same technology at issue here for four-and-a-half years.”

During that time, relations between the biometrics firms have continued to sour. A summary of events reads like the script of a high-stakes legal drama:

“Jumio previously licensed FaceTec’s ‘liveness authentication’ software, which Jumio incorporated into its product. Morrison began representing Jumio in the Fall of 2020 when FaceTec was threatening to cut off Jumio’s access to its software, which would have caused Jumio’s product to cease operating overnight. FaceTec did not relent until the last minute, after Jumio filed for a TRO. Unable to trust FaceTec, Jumio transitioned to iProov as its liveness software provider. FaceTec filed an arbitration demand against Jumio relating to the iProov transition and other events, and a patent infringement suit against iProov.”

In the end, Jumio’s argument is simple: “MOFO should not be disqualified.”

“Jumio’s longest-serving counsel, Perkins, has already been disqualified. Disqualifying Jumio’s other counsel, Morrison, would even further prejudice Jumio,” it says.

Article Topics

biometric liveness detection  |  biometrics  |  iProov  |  Jumio  |  Jumio Liveness  |  lawsuits  |  patents