Bita Rahebi serves as co-chair of Morrison Foerster’s global IP Litigation Group and cross-disciplinary Intellectual Property Group and is a co-leader of its Semiconductor Industry Group. The world’s largest and most innovative technology companies turn to Bita for her trial skills and her strategic direction leading complex, high-stakes litigation matters. She litigates before state and federal trial courts, the Federal Circuit, and the International Trade Commission on a wide range of matters involving semiconductors, software, consumer electronics, medical devices, and standard essential patents (SEPs).

As a trial lawyer, Bita is known for zealously representing her clients’ interests. She brings an ability to explain complicated issues to juries and judges, a skill honed through years of experience working with cutting-edge technologies. She has obtained a complete defense victory as lead trial lawyer, invalidated numerous patents, and also obtained winning results for plaintiffs.

Bita’s successes as an attorney have built her reputation as a recognized leader for intellectual property litigation. Chambers USA noted that Bita “offers substantial expertise handling patent disputes for technology-sector clients,” and clients have called her a “razor-sharp” lawyer who “excels at trial and litigation strategy” and is “client focused.” Bita’s accolades include:

• Named a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer by Daily Journal for multiple years
• Recognized for Intellectual Property: Patent Litigation, California in the 2022–2024 Chambers USA guides
• Selected as Intellectual Property, Women Leader in Tech Law 2024 by The Recorder
• Named a Leading IP Strategist, IAM Strategy 300 2024
• Recognized in “Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys” in 2023 by the Los Angeles Business Journal
• Named to IAM’s Patent 1000 list for Litigation (2022–2024)

Bita’s litigation practice includes patent, trade secrets, and copyright litigation. Additionally, Bita advises clients on strategic transactional issues and negotiates on behalf of clients in patent licensing discussions. Bita has also successfully tried criminal jury matters at the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office, securing a guilty verdict for every trial.

Bita is the past president of the Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association and she co-founded the organization’s Women in IP committee. She also served as a Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference Lawyer Representative.

Earning her B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley, she served as president and editor-in-chief of the Daily Californian. She received her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles, where she was an editor of the UCLA Law Review.

Representative Experience:

• Nevro Corp. v. Stimwave Technologies Inc. (District of Delaware). Represented Nevro Corp., a public global medical device company, in its patent battle against competitor Stimwave Technologies, Inc. Secured a preliminary injunction for Nevro, after an all-day evidentiary hearing. The case subsequently settled after Stimwave stipulated to a permanent injunction agreeing not to infringe the patents.

• Lamar v. Beats, Dr. Dre, and Jimmy Iovine (LA Superior Court). Represented Defendants in a breach of written royalty agreement involving the design of Beats headphones.

• Analog Devices v. Xilinx Inc. (District of Delaware). Represented Xilinx in a 16-patent case, including a counterclaim by Xilinx against ADI.

• Farstone Technology, Inc. v. Apple Inc. (Central District of California). Represented Apple in a patent infringement suit against Farstone Technology Inc. Secured a victory for Apple and invalidated the asserted patent on Williamson grounds. The decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

• AirWatch, LLC v. Good Technology Corp. (Northern District of Georgia; District of Delaware). Represented AirWatch in patent infringement actions against Good and also defended AirWatch in a patent infringement action in D. Delaware.

• Digital Empire v. Compal Electronics (Southern District of California). Lead counsel defending original design manufacturer and three of its subsidiaries in patent infringement action; successfully obtained order for fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (exceptional case).

• eTool Development, Inc. v. National Semiconductor Corporation (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Texas Instruments (formerly National Semiconductor) in a patent infringement lawsuit involving online configuration software. Prevailed on summary judgment on two separate non-infringement grounds. Successfully defeated motion for reconsideration.

• Cypress Semiconductor v. Altera Corporation (Santa Clara Superior Court). Represented Altera Corporation in trade secrets litigation brought by Cypress Semiconductor concerning programmable logic devices. A favorable settlement was reached prior to trial.