Litigation Associate
Current- B.E. Tech. v. Google (D. Del.): Representing Google in patent litigation allegedly related to internet advertising.- SoundClear Tech. v. Google (E.D. Va.): Representing Google in patent litigation allegedly relating to detecting and evaluating speech signals.- Network Apps v. AT&T (S.D.N.Y.): Representing AT&T in patent and contract litigation allegedly related to telecommunications systems.- AudienceScience v. Google (N.D. Cal., Fed. Cir.): Representing Google in patent litigation allegedly related to internet advertising.- Flyp v. Google (W.D. Tex.): Representing Google in patent litigation allegedly related to telephony systems.- Ancora Techs. v. Google (W.D. Tex.): Representing Google patent litigation alleged related to identifying and restricting an unauthorized software program's operation.- Grus Tech v. Google (W.D. Tex.): Represented Google in patent litigation allegedly related to systems and methods for identifying a contactee for a message.- Kim v. Samsung (E.D. Tex.): Represented Samsung in patent litigation related to mobile device security.- Aire Tech. v. Google (W.D. Tex.): Represented Google in patent litigation related to NFC and secure digital payments.- KlausTech v. Google (N.D. Cal.): Represented Google in patent litigation related to internet advertising systems.- Garrity Power Serv. v. Samsung (E.D. Tex.): Represented Samsung in patent litigation related to wireless charging.- TJTM Techs. v. Samsung (N.D. Cal.): Represented Samsung in patent litigation related to suppressing user notifications.- Certain Dental and Orthodontic Scanners and Software (ITC): Represented Align Technology.- Innovation Scis. v. HTC (E.D. Tex., E.D. Va., ITC): Represented HTC in patent litigations relating to wireless communications and home automation technology.- BlackBerry v. Snap (C.D. Cal.): Represented Snap in patent litigation, took deposition of fact witness, and assisted in successful 35 U.S.C. § 101 summary judgment motions.