Morrison Foerster is an international law firm with lawyers practicing throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe. Click to discover more.

mofo_share_image.jpg

Morrison Foerster

common-default.jpeg

Terms / Notices

Cookies

Privacy Policy

Reporting Hotline

Attorney Advertising

Alumni

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

  Facebook

MoFo Facebook

YouTube

MoFo Youtube

Morrison Foerster - Footer

Morrison Foerster Honored at the Managing IP Americas Awards 2025

You have not solved the recaptcha challenge yet or session expired, try again.

Email Disclaimer

Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/about/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a>, 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.

Feedback

mofo-logo-2022.svg

People

Capabilities

Resources

About

Culture

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

Morrison Foerster has been named as a winner in three categories at the 20th annual Managing IP Americas Awards. The awards...

About Morrison Foerster

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

Morrison Foerster has been named as a winner in three categories at the 20th annual Managing IP Americas Awards. The awards identify leading law firms and practitioners through a combination of market research and firm submissions. The awards highlight industry leaders who provide counsel on some of the most complex IP law matters.MoFo was awarded:<ul><li>U.S. Firm of the Year – ITC</li><li>U.S. Firm of the Year – Copyright (West)</li></ul>In addition to the recognition received for the group, Alex Yap, co-chair of the firm’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) practice, was named PTAB Practitioner of the Year. As a former administrative patent law judge at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alex helps clients navigate post-grant adversarial proceedings before the PTAB.MoFo was also named a finalist in numerous other categories at the Managing IP Awards, reflecting the breadth of our IP offerings. This included being shortlisted for U.S. Firm of the Year for Patent Prosecution and Regional Firm of the Year for IP. Additionally, six partners were shortlisted for their achievements this year:<ul><li>Joe Gratz, U.S. Practitioner of the Year (Copyright)</li><li>Joyce Liou, U.S. Practitioner of the Year (Trademark Prosecution)</li><li>Brian Matsui, U.S. Practitioner of the Year (Appellate)</li><li>Catherine Polizzi, U.S. Practitioner of the Year (Patent Prosecution)</li><li>Bita Rahebi, Litigator of the Year (California)</li><li>Mark Whitaker, U.S. Practitioner of the Year (ITC)</li></ul>Morrison Foerster’s Intellectual Property practice is the work of an interdepartmental group of lawyers focusing on patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, unfair competition, technology transactions, licensing, and related intellectual property matters. The firm has one of the largest Intellectual Property practices of any general practice firm—with more than 300 lawyers stationed in major financial centers in the United States, Asia, and Europe—and represents the most innovative companies and recognizable brands in the world.Winners were celebrated at the Managing IP Americas Awards 2025 ceremony on April 24, 2025.View the <a href="https://www.managingip.com/article/2egyfzzzh6586vsemat4x/managing-ip-awards/managing-ip-americas-awards-2025-shortlists-announced" target="_blank">full list of honorees</a>.

Morrison Foerster Honored at the Managing IP Americas Awards 2025

Sign Up

Alex Yap co-chairs the firm’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) practice and is a member of Morrison Foerster’s IP Litigation practice. As a former administrative patent law judge at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), he helps clients navigate post-grant adversarial proceedings before the PTAB. He focuses his practice on America Invents Act trials before the PTAB, as well as IP litigation matters.Prior to rejoining the firm, Alex served as an administrative patent judge at the USPTO in San Jose, California. In that capacity, he presided over more than 200 ex parte appeals, inter partes reviews, and covered business method patent proceedings.Utilizing his electrical and computer engineering degrees and experience from senior engineering roles, Alex spent 11 years at MoFo advising technology clients on patent litigations. During that time, he was involved in more than 30 USPTO reexamination/review proceedings and obtained cancellations of asserted claims in numerous cases.Prior to becoming a lawyer, Alex spent more than four years as a circuit design engineer for Freescale (formerly Motorola, Inc.) and Analog Devices, Inc., designing embedded non-volatile (flash) memories and asymmetric digital subscriber line chipsets. During that time, he developed extensive expertise in computer hardware and software architecture, communication systems, digital and analog circuit design, and digital signal processing. He has published numerous technical articles in trade journals and is an inventor on multiple U.S. patents.Alex received his B.S. and M.S. in electrical and computer engineering from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1993 and 1998, respectively, and his J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of Minnesota Law School in 2005. He was an editor of The Minnesota Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif.Alex is a member of the California State Bar and is registered to practice before the USPTO. He is also a member of the American Association of Patent Judges.

Alex Yap

Partner

Clients turn to Joe Gratz to handle trailblazing litigation where copyright and trademark law meet new technologies. An experienced litigator, Joe draws on his strong technical background to distill complex issues into simple, accurate concepts for judges, juries, and clients. Joe’s cases have set key precedents in Internet law, from the Google Books case that laid the groundwork for today’s generative AI innovations to key cases establishing the boundaries of intermediary liability. In addition to representing their interests in the courtroom, Joe helps his clients navigate their thorniest product counseling puzzles to reduce the risk of litigation.His appellate victory in Long v. Facebook set the standard for platforms in carrying out DMCA removals of user-generated content. And Joe’s win in Stevens v. CoreLogic established limitations on DMCA 1202 claims that have since been adopted by numerous other courts. His amicus brief on behalf of independent booksellers was cited by the Supreme Court in its opinion in Wiley v. Kirtsaeng, and he has submitted amicus briefs in other copyright cases on behalf of Center for Democracy & Technology (in Oracle v. Google) and on behalf of art law professors (in Warhol v. Goldsmith).A recognized commentator on copyright and internet law, Joe was selected as an advisor for the American Law Institute’s project to develop a Restatement of Copyright, and serves on the Advisory Board of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. He frequently speaks on emerging issues in Internet law and was called upon by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 to testify about the interaction between the DMCA 512 safe harbor and fair use. Joe was the 2022 recipient of the California Lawyers Association’s IP Vanguard award, presented to one private practitioner each year for achievements at the forefront of emerging issues in intellectual property law.

Joseph Gratz

Joyce Liou chairs the Trademark Group and is a partner in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. She engages in a broad intellectual property practice, with an emphasis on both IP counseling and litigation for a diverse roster of clients. Joyce has litigated numerous district court disputes involving trademark, copyright, false advertising, right of publicity, and unfair competition claims, and has secured preliminary injunctions, summary judgment rulings, and trial verdicts for her clients. In addition to federal litigation, she routinely handles proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and has extensive experience with trademark clearance, prosecution, licensing, and due diligence. Joyce manages IP portfolios and provides global strategies for industry giants and startups alike, from a broad spectrum of fields, including technology, consumer goods, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, food, and agriculture.Joyce’s successes have built her reputation as a recognized leader in trademark law. In 2022 and 2023, she was shortlisted for Trademark Lawyer of the Year by Euromoney Legal Media. Joyce serves on the Legislation and Regulation Committee for the International Trademark Association. Outside of her practice, Joyce is a passionate advocate for diversity and inclusion in the greater community. She serves on the Development Committee for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and participates in clinics to help individuals seeking U.S. naturalization or asylum on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.Joyce received her J.D. cum laude from the University of Michigan Law School in 2010. While attending law school, she externed for the Honorable William H. Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. She received her B.A. in economics and political science with distinction from the University of California, Berkeley in 2007.

Joyce Liou

Brian Matsui co-chairs Morrison Foerster’s Appellate and Supreme Court practice. Brian is a go-to appellate advocate for sophisticated clients in complex appeals. Brian has a nationwide appellate practice. He has argued many cases in federal and state appellate courts throughout the country, winning appeals involving federal preemption, securities litigation and enforcement, consumer class actions, and intellectual property. He has led appeals in the D.C., Second, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits. His arguments include significant victories in class action appeals and in appeals for leading financial services companies, with multiple victories in the Ninth Circuit, where he clerked. Brian recently has gone five for six when representing appellants, including a precedential victory in the Ninth Circuit in a licensing dispute concerning alleged patent misuse. He also argued and won a D.C. Circuit appeal against the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) about the retroactivity of part of the Dodd-Frank Act. As a result of Brian’s win, the SEC had to change its enforcement practices against certain securities industry professionals.Clients frequently turn to Brian for his substantial experience with appeals in the Federal Circuit, praising him as “an invaluable advocate in patent matters” (Chambers USA). Brian has won 13 of his last 15 appeals in that Court. His arguments before the Federal Circuit include winning appeals from district courts, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the International Trade Commission. He has handled appeals in a myriad of industries, including mobile devices, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, semiconductors, and software.Brian also plays a key role on trial teams, advising clients on both critical legal issues and appellate preservation. He recently argued and prevailed against a summary judgment invalidity motion in a case involving Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.’s revolutionary antibody recycling technology, which ultimately led to a $775 million settlement on the eve of trial for Chugai.A former law clerk for the United States Supreme Court, Brian has authored many briefs in that Court, including on important constitutional and statutory interpretation issues. He often represents clients’ interests in amicus briefs in significant Supreme Court cases affecting the business community.Leading publications have recognized Brian for his appellate skills. The Legal 500 US recommends him for appellate litigation, and the National Law Journal named Brian a “Minority 40 Under 40.”Brian also dedicates significant time to pro bono matters. He argued and won two significant appeals—in the Second and Ninth Circuits—obtaining reversals of judgments that had denied private rights of action under the Child Welfare Act in precedential decisions. Brian also led the Morrison Foerster team who co-counseled a successful Eighth Amendment challenge to Florida’s imposition of a “life without the possibility of parole” sentence to a juvenile offender convicted of a non-homicide crime.For years, Brian chaired the ABA’s seven-person Standing Committee for Amicus Curiae Briefs. He served on the American Intellectual Property Law Association’s amicus committee and co-chaired the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association’s amicus committee. Brian served as an appellate lawyer representative for the Ninth Circuit. Brian also serves on the board of directors for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.Before entering private practice, Brian clerked on the United States Supreme Court for Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. He also clerked for Judge Pamela Ann Rymer in the Ninth Circuit and Judge David F. Levi in the Eastern District of California.While in law school, Brian served as managing editor of Volume 51 of the Stanford Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif.<h4>Representative Oral Arguments</h4><ul><li><a href="https://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/default.aspx?fl=22-1260_02102023.mp3" target="_blank">SNIPR Technologies Ltd. v. Rockefeller University </a>(Fed. Cir.) Prevailed in a precedential decision reversing the Patent Office’s interpretation of the America Invents Act (AIA) that subjected patents post-dating the Act to pre-AIA interference proceedings. The decision revived five of SNIPR’s patents related to CRISPR technology.</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/220114-broadcom-corporation-v-renesas-matsui" target="_blank">Renesas Electronics Corporation v. Broadcom Corporation</a> (12:40) (Fed. Cir.) Successfully argued and briefed multiple appeals from an International Trade Commission (ITC) decision and several Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions related to an ITC investigation initiated by Broadcom involving systems-on-chip powering automobile infotainment systems.</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/210706-cr-bard-v-medline-industries" target="_self">C.R. Bard Inc. v. Medline Industries, Inc.</a> (0:45) (Fed. Cir.) Won vacatur of three Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions on obviousness.</li><li><a href="https://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/default.aspx?fl=21-1745_03102022.mp3" target="_blank">Advanced Voice Recognition Systems, Inc. v. Apple Inc.</a> (14:30) (Fed. Cir.) Secured a complete victory in appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board that all challenged patent claims were unpatentable.</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/200515-william-paulus-v-ocera-therapeutics-inc.html" target="_self">William Paulus v. Ocera Therapeutics, Inc.</a> (13:25) (9th Cir.) Successfully argued and briefed appeal in a putative shareholder class action involving a tender offer.</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/200410-kurtz-v-costco.html" target="_blank">Kurtz v. Costco Wholesale Corporation </a>(9:23) (2d Cir.) Successfully petitioned for review of a class certification decision, then argued and obtained a remand for the district court to reconsider its certification decision and an eventual reversal on an injunctive class certification decision.</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/161117-gregory-bartko-v-sec.html" target="_self">Gregory Bartko v. SEC</a> (0:53) (D.C. Cir.) Successfully argued and obtained precedential ruling that the Securities and Exchange Commission could not retroactively apply Dodd-Frank’s industry-wide sanctions on securities professionals for certain securities violations.</li></ul>

Brian Matsui

Intellectual versatility combined with incisive, pragmatic counseling and business acumen is the hallmark of Catherine’s practice.Catherine helps emerging and established companies through the challenging process of obtaining patents, and provides strategic, effective portfolio counseling and management, as well as strategic advice surrounding freedom of operation and other forms of IP assessment. She develops valuable, strategic portfolios around breakthrough therapies in a variety of areas including cancer, cancer immunotherapy, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory diseases, infectious diseases, cardiovascular diseases, metabolic disorders, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease.She also has significant experience in a wide spectrum of technology areas, including biologics (such as antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates (ADC), and polypeptides), nucleic acids, precision medicine, diagnostics, cell therapy including T cell technologies, such as chimeric antigen receptors, drug formulation technologies, drug delivery technologies, such as nanotechnologies, microfluidics, drug screening systems, AI solutions for life sciences including discovery platforms, amplification technologies, genetic screening, sequencing technologies including next generation sequencing, regenerative medicine, nutraceuticals, spectroscopy, and organic chemistry, including small molecule drugs.Catherine’s unique background, ability to integrate IP with a given business model to translate into meaningful valuation, risk assessment and advice, and highly effective communication skills in critical settings such as R&D, all phases of product development, and investment contexts, enable her to provide effective, creative solutions to the significant challenges often faced by clients. Catherine is an acquisition and value enhancement driver as well, a critical conduit for companies as they grow from startup through IPO, exit, and beyond.IP Leadership for Transactions, Financings, and Acquisitions. Catherine’s practice also includes due diligence evaluation and counseling in the context of venture investment assessments and in connection with public and private financing, spin-offs, partnerships, and mergers and acquisitions, where her IP strategies have helped drive the value of multibillion dollar deals.Representative transactions resulting from Catherine’s leadership include:<ul><li>The $74 billion acquisition by Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) of Celgene Corporation, the largest pharmaceutical-company acquisition ever to date.</li><li>Celgene Corporation’s $9 billion acquisition of client Juno Therapeutics and earlier $2.9 billion acquisition of client Abraxis BioScience.</li><li>The $2.6 billion acquisition of Nestle Health Science of client Aimmune Therapeutics.</li><li>The up to $1.1 billion development collaboration with Bristol Myers Squibb on behalf of Volastra Therapeutics, which was recognized as one of the most promising early-stage biotechnology companies in the industry by Fierce Biotech’s 2022 Fierce 15, to discover, develop, and commercialize new oncology medicines.</li><li>Dewpoint Therapeutics’ $239 million collaboration with Pfizer for the development of new treatments for a rare kind of muscular dystrophy, the $305 million collaboration with Merck on a novel approach for the treatment of HIV, and the up to $100 million partnership with Bayer to research new treatments for cardiovascular and gynecological diseases.</li><li>SQZ Biotechnologies’ $125 million partnership with Roche to work on antigen-presenting cells designed to trigger killer T cell attacks against tumors.</li><li>Frontier Medicines’ $55 million collaboration with AbbVie to develop molecules against hard-to-drug targets.</li><li>Myriad Genetics’ $375 million acquisition of Counsyl, Inc.</li><li>Turnstone Biologics’ acquisition of Myst Therapeutics.</li><li>The $14 billion acquisition by Pfizer of client Medivation, as well as the previous $225 million Pfizer investment in Medivation.</li></ul>Catherine was retained by BMS, Pfizer, Celgene, and Juno (following the acquisitions of both by BMS) for ongoing patent strategy and counseling work on the existing patent portfolios and with expanded representation of the parent companies following these acquisitions. Other representative transactions where her astute leadership has proved invaluable include:<ul><li>Johnson & Johnson’s acquisition of TARIS Biomedical, with a focus on transforming the treatment of bladder cancer.</li><li>Frontier Medicines’ Series A Preferred Stock financing of $67 million. </li><li>SQZ Biotech’s $65 million Series D financing.</li><li>Dewpoint Therapeutics’ $150 million Series C financing, $77 million Series B financing and $60 million Series A financing.</li><li>Lyndra Therapeutics’ $55 million Series B financing.</li><li>Alpine Immune Sciences’ $48 million Series A financing and subsequent $90 million merger with Nivalis Therapeutics, resulting in a publicly traded company.</li><li>Indapta Therapeutics’ $50 million Series A financing.</li><li>Cartography Biosciences' $57 million Series A financing.</li></ul>Strategist in Legal Challenges and a Key Member of Litigation Teams. In addition to helping create value and commercialize her clients’ technologies, Catherine devises strategies and defenses to fortify their patents in the event of legal challenges by competitors. Accordingly, she renders advice on all aspects of patent positioning, including opinions on patentability, validity, freedom of operation, infringement, and competitor IP evaluation. She also works in the area of third–party challenges, such as inter partes review (IPR) and oppositions.A Recognized Leader. Catherine formerly served as the chair of the firm’s Patent Prosecution & Counseling Group and co-chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. Chambers USA noted that Catherine “maintains a strong reputation for her capabilities advising biotechnology clients on portfolio management and other IP matters,” while clients note that she is “a great strategic thinker, great at flagging the high–level questions and brings a good business perspective,” and praise her for “bring[ing] a good business perspective to IP efforts which is not always evident with other IP attorneys.” Catherine has also received many awards and accolades throughout her career, including the following:  <ul><li>Recommended as a leading lawyer by Legal 500 U.S. for 2012–2024</li><li>Recognized among World’s Leading Patent Practitioners by IAM Patent 1000 for 2014-2024</li><li>Recognized as a Best Lawyer in Biotechnology and Life Sciences by Best Lawyers for 2023 and 2024</li><li>Selected as one of the Top 100 Intellectual Property Lawyers in California by the Daily Journal for 2009–2022</li></ul>Catherine is patent counsel to numerous publicly traded and privately held companies, with many new client relationships resulting from her strong reputation in the life sciences industry. A selection of her representative matters include the following:<ul><li>Genentech, the world’s first and most successful biotechnology company, relies on Catherine’s strategic patent counseling and prosecution services for its most difficult and challenging patent matters. Her work involves developing overall patent strategy, patent application drafting, and prosecution for key technologies. Her high–value work for Genentech also includes strategic assessment of key and novel technologies, as well as inter partes review and patent litigation support and advisement.</li><li>Juno Therapeutics has continuously relied on Catherine for patent strategy and prosecution. Juno is one of the best–funded start–ups in biotechnology history. It went on to become a publicly traded company in 2014 and ultimately was acquired by Celgene in 2018 for $9 billion; the strength of the patent portfolio that Catherine crafted helped drive the valuation for the deal. She led the IP team on the acquisition.</li><li>Celgene calls on Catherine for its patent strategy, drafting, and IP due diligence matters. She worked with Abraxis BioScience for many years in a similar capacity to help develop their IP position for the highly successful cancer drug, Abraxane. Catherine then counseled the company through its $2.9 billion acquisition by Celgene Corporation, including providing significant IP strategy and due diligence counseling. This IP platform was a major component of the valuation of the company. She was subsequently engaged by Celgene following the acquisition.</li><li>Dewpoint Therapeutics hired Catherine to lead their patent strategy. Dewpoint is on the cutting edge with technology relating to condensate biology, a new and paradigm-shift area of drug development. Catherine led the IP strategy and due diligence for their partnership with Bayer to research new treatments for cardiovascular and gynecological diseases. The work that Dewpoint is doing is seen as a significant move forward in the biopharma industry and opens the door to many potential new discoveries in biology through biomolecular condensates. For example, in January 2021, Dewpoint teamed up with Pfizer to develop new treatments for a rare kind of muscular dystrophy. In July 2020, Dewpoint announced their collaboration with Merck to evaluate a novel approach for the treatment of HIV.</li><li>Some of Catherine’s additional representative clients include clinical–stage and start–up companies, such Dynavax Technologies, Cytokinetics, Alpine Immune Sciences, Aimmune Therapeutics, 10x Genomics, Sonoma Biotherapeutics, CohBar, Sangamo Therapeutics, Seagen (formerly Seattle Genetics), Frontier Medicines, Maze Therapeutics, Myst Therapeutics, Sana Biotechnology, Sirenas, and Volastra Therapeutics and Boston–based SQZ Biotechnologies, Lyndra Therapeutics, Dewpoint Therapeutics, TARIS Biomedical, and Cartography Biosciences.</li></ul>

Catherine Polizzi

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:<ul><li>Named a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer by Daily Journal for multiple years</li><li>Recognized for Intellectual Property: Patent Litigation, California in the 2022–2024 Chambers USA guides</li><li>Selected as Intellectual Property, Women Leader in Tech Law 2024 by The Recorder</li><li>Named a Leading IP Strategist, IAM Strategy 300 2024</li><li>Recognized in “Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys” in 2023 by the Los Angeles Business Journal</li><li>Named to IAM’s Patent 1000 list for Litigation (2022–2024)</li></ul>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.<h4>Representative Experience:</h4><ul><li>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.</li><li>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.</li><li>Analog Devices v. Xilinx Inc. (District of Delaware). Represented Xilinx in a 16-patent case, including a counterclaim by Xilinx against ADI.</li><li>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.</li><li>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.</li><li>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).</li><li>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.</li><li>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.</li></ul>

Bita Rahebi

Mark Whitaker is co-chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation Practice and has more than 30 years of experience crafting legal strategies in high-stakes patent and trade secret litigation.Mark sees the whole board for each of his clients, and works closely with them to define a successful litigation outcome and determine the best path to achieve that goal. He has extensive experience navigating the rules and procedures in the nation’s top patent litigation venues, including U.S. district courts, the International Trade Commission, and the Court of Federal Claims.Mark regularly acts as lead counsel in matters involving technologies such as semiconductors, photo/optical technologies, chemicals, and database analytics. His clients do business in a broad range of industries including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, consumer products, and telecommunications. He often leads a team of MoFo lawyers representing several defendants in parallel multipatent litigations.A past president of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Mark was elected to their prestigious Fellows membership in 2019. He is a frequent speaker at the American Bar Association, the Practising Law Institute, the Minority Corporate Counsel Association, and numerous CLE events all over the country. He is also the current co-chair of MoFo’s Diversity Strategy Committee, building on decades of experience leading law firm diversity and inclusion efforts. Additionally, Mark currently serves on Law360’s Intellectual Property Editorial Advisory Board, having been selected twice since 2021.Mark is a veteran of the U.S. Navy, having served first as a surface warfare officer and later as a member of the Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps. Following his military service, he began his private-practice legal career as a commercial litigator before concentrating on IP and technology litigation.