Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Incorporated (ASSIA) v. Charter Communications, Inc. (E.D. Texas) Representing ASSIA, a pioneering Wi-Fi innovator founded by a team from Stanford University (https://assia-inc.com), in an ongoing 5-patent case enforcing ASSIA’s patented technologies against one of the nation’s leading cable and Wi-Fi providers. Set for trial in the fall of 2025.
RightQuestion, LLC v. AT&T, Verizon (E.D. Texas) Representing RightQuestion, an innovative technology company, enforcing its patented technologies from use by major telecommunications companies in reducing spoofing in telephone networks in large three-patent case. Filed Oct. 2025 and trial in Q1 2027.
IngenioSpec, LLC v. Apple, Inc., (W.D. Texas Case No. 25-cv-00867) Representing IngenioSpec, an innovator of earbud technologies including those used in Apple’s earbuds, in two patent infringement cases asserting six patents against Apple products.
RavenWhite Licensing LLC v. Walmart, Home Depot (E.D. Texas) Representing RavenWhite Licensing, protecting patented technologies from unauthorized use by large retailers’ website on-line systems interacting with customers' purchasing activities, a three-patent case. Set for trial in fall 2025.
Keyless Licensing, LLC v. Samsung Electronics, Ltd. (E.D. Texas) Representing Keyless Licensing, an innovator of cell phone technologies, enforcing its inventions being used by leading cell phone maker in a 3-patent case. Set for trial in 2026.
University Client v. AT&T and Verizon (E.D. Texas case No. 25-cv-00054-JRG-RSP) Representing large research university enforcing patented Wi-Fi telecommunication inventions in ongoing two-patent case, filed January 2025. Jury trial set for Q3 2026.
Wapp Technologies, LLC v. Micro Focus, Inc., HP Enterprises, Inc. (E.D. Texas Case No. 4:18-cv-00469-ALM) Won jury trial and $172.5 million jury verdict of willful infringement (the full amount requested at trial) against publicly traded UK company that acquired HPE’s software business in multi-patent infringement case in March 2021. Verdict appears to be the largest verdict in the history of the Sherman Division courthouse in Eastern District of Texas.
Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (E.D. Texas). Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (E.D. Texas) Represented Polaris in substantial patent infringement cases protecting various patented technologies implemented in mobile phones and televisions. Won claim construction and mostly all pre-trial motions. The case settled favorably on confidential terms on the eve of jury trial after defeating Samsung’s motions for summary judgment, Daubert motions and motions to strike expert opinions, and motions in limine.
University of Michigan v. Leica Microsystems, Inc. (N.D. California) Represented University of Michigan in an important patent infringement action enforcing the university’s leading edge patented microscope technology.
Broadband iTV v. Amazon.com, Inc. (W.D. Texas) Represented pioneering video on demand (VOD) and content management technology company, BBiTV, in multi-patent case focusing on Amazon Prime and related streaming media services.
Broadband iTV, Inc. v. AT&T, DirecTV, Dish Network LLC (W. D. Texas) Represented pioneering video on demand and content management technology company, BBiTV, in three consolidated 5-patent cases filed in December 2019.
Express Mobile v. Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Salesforce, Slack Inc., eBay, Microsoft Corp. (W.D. Texas & N.D. California) Represented plaintiff, leading developer of software tools, in large multi-patent related patent infringement cases.
Uniloc v. Microsoft (CD California) Represented plaintiff Uniloc in multiple patent lawsuits relating to distributed and cloud software, software security, mobile and wireless technologies.
Uniloc v. Netflix, Uniloc v. Hulu, Uniloc v. Roku, Uniloc v. ABC (C. D. California) Represented plaintiff Uniloc in four patent infringement cases involving digital streaming and video coding and compression technologies.
Uniloc v. AT&T, Uniloc v. Verizon (E.D. Texas) Represented plaintiff Uniloc in four patent infringement cases involving 4G LTE and LTE-A, cellular and video coding technologies.
Polaris PowerLED v. VIZIO, TPV, TCL (CD California) Represented plaintiff Polaris in multiple patent infringement cases concerning LED backlight systems.
OpenTV, Inc. v. NFL Enterprises, LLC. Represented OpenTV in a seven patent case involving verifying PIN codes giving users access to password-restricted websites and applications, methods of inserting content into video streams using time-code indicators, methods of allowing users to interact with videos and a method of connecting multiple video metadata sets, methods of programming software to identify if a computer does not have the right applications to run certain media, methods of combining multiple media data streams into a single broadcast stream and methods of connecting streaming videos with other websites via a link.
Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II v. Motorola Mobility (District of Delaware and S. D. Florida) Represented Intellectual Ventures in back to back patent infringement trials in Delaware and won both trials. The asserted patents relate to technology in smart phones including sending MMS messages, power allocation and conservation and docking stations.
Intellectual Ventures II v. JPMorgan et. al. (S. D. New York) Represented Intellectual Ventures II in a patent infringement matter against several JPMorgan Chase entities. The asserted patent relates to a cryptographic co-processor for processing RSA or ECC algorithms.
Intellectual Ventures II v. Citibank et. al. (S. D. New York) Represented Intellectual Ventures II in a patent infringement matter against several Citibank entities. The asserted patent relates to a cryptographic co-processor for processing RSA or ECC algorithms.
Sun Microsystems v. Network Appliance (N. D. California) Represented Sun in three separate patent infringement cases involving processors, servers, networking and storage technology.
Gateway v. Hewlett-Packard (International Trade Commission) Represented defendant computer manufacturer in patent infringement trial concerning multimedia computer technology combining digital television and audio technologies. The Administrative Law Judge found the patent unenforceable and invalid on multiple grounds and no violation of Section 337.
Hewlett-Packard v. Acer; Acer v. Hewlett-Packard (E. D. Texas; W. D. Wisconsin) Represented Hewlett-Packard in multi-jurisdiction patent infringement dispute relating to personal computer architecture and design, microprocessors and peripheral devices. Obtained favorable settlement.
AuthenTec v. Hestia Technologies (M. D. Florida) Represented plaintiff manufacturer of biometric fingerprint sensors in IP dispute involving semiconductor packaging technology. Successfully obtained an exceptional case ruling and favorable settlement for client.
Hewlett-Packard v. Gateway (S. D. California) Represented plaintiff computer manufacturer in patent infringement case in the Southern District of California. Case involved 19 patents (14 asserted by plaintiff and 5 asserted by defendant) relating to personal computer architecture and design, microprocessors and peripheral devices, such as monitors, keyboards and projectors. Obtained favorable Markman rulings and settlement.
Hewlett-Packard v. Gateway (ITC) Represented plaintiff computer manufacturer in patent infringement case in the International Trade Commission involving patents related to computer architecture, microprocessors, peripherals and monitors. Obtained favorable settlement.
