Lee Ai Ming

Lee Ai Ming is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 6 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patents and intellectual property law. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated expertise across 24 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and patents.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	6 cases	18% of total caseload	General Practice28% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 18% of their total caseload.
Patents	3 cases	9% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized81% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Pharmaceutical Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Passing Off	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Groundless threats of infringement proceedings	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trade names	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Invalidity	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Bad faith	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Ownership	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Inventions	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Medicines Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lee Ai Ming has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Lee Ai Ming has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rodyk & Davidson LLP	3 cases	50% of cases	Ship's Equipment Centre Bremen GmbH v Fuji Trading: Patent Infringement & Validity of Twistlock Coupling Device(Jun 2015) AstraZeneca v Sanofi-Aventis: Patent Infringement, Medicines Act s12A, Product Licensing(Jan 2012) ASM Assembly Automation Ltd v Aurigin Technology: Patent Infringement & Validity in Solder Ball Placement Technology(Sep 2009)
Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP	2 cases	33% of cases	Towa Corp v ASM Technology: Patent Infringement & Damages Assessment(Apr 2023) Tomy Inc v Dentsply Sirona Inc: Trade Mark Invalidity & Bad Faith Dispute(May 2020)
Rodyk & Davidson	1 cases	17% of cases	Nippon Paint v ICI Paint: Passing Off Dispute over '3 in 1' Paint(Oct 2000)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lee Ai Ming's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.4
Complex Cases: 2 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	24.0 parties avg	4.0	33%
Partial	13.0 parties avg	3.0	17%
Won	33.2 parties avg	3.2	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2020	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Lee Ai Ming's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(33%)	33%
Partial	1(17%)	17%
Won	3(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 6 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Towa Corp v ASM Technology: Patent Infringement & Damages Assessment 13 Apr 2023 TOWA Corporation (Plaintiff)Partial	13 Apr 2023	TOWA Corporation (Plaintiff): Damages awarded, subject to re-computationDamages awarded to Towa, subject to re-computation based on the court's findings. The currency is JPY, as it is the functional currency of Towa Corporation.
2	Tomy Inc v Dentsply Sirona Inc: Trade Mark Invalidity & Bad Faith Dispute 19 May 2020 Tomy Incorporated (Appellant)Lost	19 May 2020	Tomy Incorporated (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Tomy Inc. to bear the costs of the respondent. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Ship's Equipment Centre Bremen GmbH v Fuji Trading: Patent Infringement & Validity of Twistlock Coupling Device 22 Jun 2015 Ship’s Equipment Centre Bremen GmbH (Plaintiff)Lost	22 Jun 2015	Ship’s Equipment Centre Bremen GmbH (Plaintiff): Applications to amend the patents dismissedThe court dismissed the plaintiff's applications to amend the patents.
4	AstraZeneca v Sanofi-Aventis: Patent Infringement, Medicines Act s12A, Product Licensing 18 Jan 2012 AstraZeneca AB (SE) (Plaintiff)Won	18 Jan 2012	AstraZeneca AB (SE) (Plaintiff): Application to strike out claim dismissedThe defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
5	ASM Assembly Automation Ltd v Aurigin Technology: Patent Infringement & Validity in Solder Ball Placement Technology 15 Sep 2009 Tam Wing Wah (Defendant)Won	15 Sep 2009	Tam Wing Wah (Defendant): Counterclaim AllowedAurigin's counterclaim for groundless threats of patent infringement was allowed. An inquiry into damages was ordered. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Nippon Paint v ICI Paint: Passing Off Dispute over '3 in 1' Paint 30 Oct 2000 ICI Paint (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant)Won	30 Oct 2000	ICI Paint (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claim of passing off was dismissed with costs to be taxed or agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.