Mary Prendergast

Partner | Washington, D.C. | (202) 887-8757
(202) 887-8757
I love diving deep into my client’s technology, while focusing on how to explain that technology in a way judges and juries can understand.

Mary is a trial lawyer with extensive experience litigating patent and trade secrets cases in district courts across the country and at the International Trade Commission.  She frequently oversees the day-to-day strategy and management of complex litigation from pre-suit investigation through trial and appeal. 

Mary represents clients in a wide variety of industries, including semiconductors, software, medical devices, electronics, and telecommunications.  She has obtained favorable outcomes for clients at every stage of litigation, including as a member of the trial team for high-profile smartphone cases that led to verdicts totaling over $1 billion.

With an active pro bono practice, Mary has evaluated potential cases for the California Innocence Project, represented tenants seeking to remedy dangerous housing conditions, and worked on civil rights matters in coordination with the ACLU. 

Mary received her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles, where she was editor-in-chief of the UCLA Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs. She received her B.F.A. cum laude from the University of Notre Dame.

Show More


  • Represented a smartphone manufacturer in high-profile patent litigation that resulted in jury verdicts totaling over $1.1 billion.

  • (Northern District of California). Representing Teradata against SAP in complex litigation alleging misappropriation of trade secrets under the DTSA and California Civil Code, copyright infringement, and antitrust violations. Matter is pending.

  • (District of Delaware). Represented BASF in patent litigation involving materials used to catalyze and reduce NOx and NH3 oxidation in exhaust systems. Matter resolved due to favorable settlement.

  • (ITC, Inv. 337-TA-1059). Represented Nikon Corporation in an investigation alleging infringement of patents related to digital cameras. The case settled after trial on favorable terms.

  • (Central District of California). Represented Entrata Inc. in six-year-long trade secret, copyright, and antitrust dispute involving property management software. Case settled on favorable terms after jury selection.

  • (Central District of California). Represented several Alcon entities in patent litigation regarding femtosecond lasers for eye surgery. Prevailed on summary judgment that the three asserted patents were not infringed by the accused devices.

  • (International Trade Commission, 337-TA-994). Represented respondent BlackBerry in an ITC investigation involving a hierarchical user interface for accessing music tracks on portable media players. Obtained an early initial determination from the ALJ finding the asserted patent invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

  • (Arbitration/Central District of California). Represented Alcon LenSx in a three-day patent infringement and licensing arbitration hearing involving laser-tissue interaction technology, resulting in a complete victory for Alcon LenSx that was confirmed by the district court and affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

  • (District of Massachusetts). Represented Nikon Metrology in a two-week jury trial in a patent case involving laser line scanner and articulated arm metrology solutions.

  • (Southern District of New York). Defended Nikon against patent infringement claims aimed at lithography machines used in fabrication of most of the large-panel LCD displays in the world, including drafting of summary judgment briefing that resulted in a judgment of invalidity on all asserted patents.

  • (Southern District of New York). Represented the manufacturer of a generic version of Copaxone, Teva’s $4 billion multiple sclerosis drug, in a three-week trial under the Hatch-Waxman Act.

  • (Eastern District of Texas). Represented the manufacturer of a generic version of the glaucoma treatment Lumigan 0.01% in a week-long trial under the Hatch-Waxman Act.

Show More


Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.