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 recognized in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide

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

Community

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

Morrison Foerster’s Intellectual Property (IP) Group was recognized in 11 practice areas, with 25 lawyers achieving 31 individual...

<h3>Sorry, we weren’t able to find the terms you entered.</h3>Please try a different term or keyword.

People

Capabilities

Resources

Not Found Cards

About Morrison Foerster

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

Morrison Foerster’s Intellectual Property (IP) Group was recognized in 11 practice areas, with 25 lawyers achieving 31 individual recognitions in the 2026 edition of IAM Patent 1000. The annual guide identifies the leading patent professionals and firms in key jurisdictions around the world. IAM compiles the guide based on thousands of interviews with patent lawyers and in-house counsel.MoFo’s recognitions include the following:<ul><li>California: Litigation – Silver</li><li>California: Prosecution – Recommended</li><li>California: Transactions – Recommended</li><li>DC Metro Area: Litigation – Bronze</li><li>DC Metro Area: Prosecution – Recommended</li><li>USA National: Litigation – Silver</li><li>USA National: Transactions – Recommended</li><li>International – Recommended</li><li>Japan: Litigation – Highly Recommended</li><li>Japan: Transactions – Highly Recommended</li><li>United Kingdom (England and Wales): Transactions – Bronze</li></ul>Daralyn Durie has been awarded a Gold ranking in California: Litigation, while Max Olson and Chie Yakura have been awarded Gold rankings in Japan: Litigation. Ranked in the Silver category are Yukihiro Terazawa for Japan: Litigation; Brian Nash for Texas: Litigation; and Scott Llewellyn in Colorado: Litigation. Ranked Bronze are Yuichi Inase for Japan: Litigation; Bindu Donovan for New York: Litigation; Brian Matsui, Deanne Maynard, Daniel Muino, and Mark Whitaker in DC: Litigation; and Timothy Chen Saulsbury, Matthew Chivvis, Richard Hung, and Bita Rahebi in California: Litigation.The following individuals also received Recommended rankings in this year’s guide:<ul><li>Daralyn Durie, USA National: Life Sciences Litigation</li><li>Deanne Maynard, USA National: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit</li><li>Jonathan Bockman, DC Metro Area: Prosecution</li><li>Catherine Polizzi, California: Transactions and California: Prosecution</li><li>Michael Ward, California: Transactions and California: Prosecution</li><li>Aaron Rubin, California: Transactions</li><li>Tessa Schwartz, California: Transactions</li><li>William Schwartz, California: Transactions</li><li>Seth Graham, Japan: Transactions (Highly Recommended)</li><li>Masato Hayakawa, Japan: Transactions</li><li>Alistair Maughan, United Kingdom (England): Transactions</li></ul>To view the full list of Morrison Foerster’s rankings, please visit the publication’s <a href="https://www.iam-media.com/rankings/patent-1000/profile/firm/morrison-foerster-llp" target="_blank">website</a>.

Morrison Foerster recognized in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide

Sign Up

Jon Bockman is the head of the firm’s Technology Patent Practice. In this capacity, he leads the firm’s prominent group of patent practitioners with degrees in electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, computer science, computer engineering, chemical engineering, biomedical engineering and physics. His team handles work in all technology areas including medical devices, AI and machine learning, cybersecurity, computer hardware, advanced materials, and robotics. His practice concentrates on domestic and international patent prosecution, portfolio management, IP due diligence, patent infringement and validity determinations, and IP litigation support. His clients range from some of the largest domestic and international companies to early-stage startups.As lead patent prosecution counsel for several large and emerging companies, Jon has helped clients set up patent departments and committees for building and maintaining strategic patent portfolios. Clients note to IAM Patent 1000 that “[Jon] provides expert legal advice that is clear, understandable and tailored to the needs of the specific client. He is very responsive and is always available when you need him.”Jon has extensive experience helping clients navigate IP concerns including freedom-to-operate and potential litigation issues. Jon is also experienced with leading patent due diligence projects related to investments and mergers and acquisitions. He often leads investor-side and company-side patent due diligence reviews related to these transactions.Jon is a member of the firm’s Inter Partes Review and Post Grant Practice. In this capacity, he handles inter partes review and post-grant review proceedings that were introduced by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. He has also handled many disputes for clients in front of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), including inter partes reexaminations, ex parte reexaminations, and derivation proceedings.Jon is recognized as an IP Star by Managing Intellectual Property and as a leading patent practitioner by IAM Patent 1000. He is also recommended by The Legal 500 US for patent prosecution. While earning his J.D., Jon was the associate editor of the University of Colorado Law Review.

Jonathan Bockman

Partner

Matthew is Co-Chair of Morrison & Foerster LLP’s Life Sciences IP Litigation Group, where he has long made it his mission to protect his clients’ intellectual property and defend them when they are wrongly accused of infringement. His hearing and trial experience is extensive. Whether exploring complex technical issues regarding a biologic drug, or digging into the finer points of patent law, he excels at keeping his opponents on their toes. Intellectual Asset Management 1000 remarked that Matthew is “a skilled technical lawyer and brief writer who can handle large and nuanced cases.” He has litigated patent and contract matters in many of the top IP venues throughout the United States, including the District Courts of California, Texas, Delaware, and New Jersey, the Federal Circuit, and the International Trade Commission.Life sciences clients often rely on Matthew’s extensive experience and his ability to grasp complex and cutting-edge issues quickly. His work in this area includes proceedings involving monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, small molecule inhibitors, vaccines, nutritional supplements, bioimplants, drug-eluting stents, blood glucose monitoring devices, plant genetics, and animal husbandry. He knows the ins and outs of the “patent dance” in Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) proceedings, and has advised clients on successful strategies for engaging in multi-phased BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman Act matters.Matthew is a registered patent attorney, and his considerable experience includes practicing before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, especially in inter partes and post grant review proceedings. He also regularly advises clients on plant and agriculture intellectual property matters, including strategic use of plant patents, plant-variety protection certificates, and trademark rights. In addition to life sciences matters, Matthew has litigated cases involving internet firewalls, network security, virtualization, smartphone, interactive television, website, and display technologies.Matthew graduated from law school magna cum laude and was presented with the Academic Excellence Award for his graduating class. He clerked for Chief Judge James Ware (ret.) of the Northern District of California from 2007 to 2008. Before law school, Matthew received a Bachelor of Science in molecular biology.Having grown up in Alaska, Matthew has great appreciation for the outdoors. In his free time, he enjoys skiing, cycling, and alpine mountaineering.

Matthew Chivvis

Bindu Donovan has been litigating high-stakes intellectual property disputes in the life sciences field for over 25 years.Bindu, a seasoned partner in Morrison Foerster's Intellectual Property Litigation group specializes in patent litigation in U.S. federal district courts. She has a broad range of experience in life sciences, representing clients in matters related to biologic and small-molecule drugs, medical devices, recombinant proteins, and vaccines. Her extensive portfolio extends to representing innovator companies in Hatch-Waxman cases covering treatments for ADHD, diabetes, influenza, hypertension, and metastatic prostate cancer, including blockbuster drugs.Bindu excels in leading large litigation teams in all aspects of complex patent infringement disputes, including pre-suit investigations, pre-trial and expert discovery, trial preparation, and trial. She is adept at coordinating global strategies for her clients' most important products. Additionally, her experience includes breach of contract and trade secret disputes.Bindu has been consistently recognized as a leading practitioner in her field. LMG Life Sciences acknowledged her contributions to life sciences-related patent work, and IAM Patent 1000 ranked her as a Leading IP Litigation Lawyer. Additional notable accolades include being named one of the Top 250 Women in Litigation and a Local Litigation Star by Benchmark Litigation. Managing Intellectual Property also named her an “IP Star” and one of the Top 250 Women in IP.Bindu served as the 2025 President of the New Jersey Intellectual Property Law Association (NJIPLA) and participates in various other legal organizations.<h4>Representative Experience</h4><ul><li>Represented an international biopharmaceutical company in patent infringement suit filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act involving a medication for multiple sclerosis.</li><li>Represented international biopharmaceutical company in matter involving offensive and defensive patent assertion strategy concerning vaccines.</li><li>Represented international biopharmaceutical companies in matters involving biologic therapies.</li><li>Represented VMI Holland BV in breach of contract action.</li><li>Represented patent holder Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., in patent infringement suits filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act involving pulmonary arterial hypertension drug Tracleer®.</li><li>Represented patent holder Avanos in patent infringement suit involving cooled radiofrequency ablation products.</li><li>Represented patent holder Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, Janssen, in patent infringement suits filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act and inter partes review proceedings involving prostate cancer drug, Zytiga®.</li><li> Represented patent holders Gilead and Roche/Genentech in patent infringement suit filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act involving influenza drug, Tamiflu®.</li><li>Represented patent holders Cordis Corporation and Wyeth in patent infringement suits involving drug eluting stents.</li><li>Represented defendant Johnson & Johnson in patent infringement suit involving sunscreen compositions.</li><li>Represented an international biopharmaceutical company in a patent infringement lawsuit filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act involving a medication for ADHD.</li><li>Represented patent holder SmithKline Beecham in patent infringement suit filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act involving Type 2 diabetes drug, Avandia®.</li></ul>

Bindu Donovan

Daralyn Durie is among the top trial lawyers in the country, acting as go-to trial counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants. Daralyn’s exceptional track record has earned her consistent recognition from leading national publications. Chambers has listed her among the top 10 intellectual property lawyers in the U.S. and Law360 has recognized her as an “Icon of IP” and an MVP. Benchmark Litigation reported that “going against her was like going against a boxer in which you know you’re going to get hurt.” She’s a fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates, and an inductee into the California Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame.Daralyn’s legal career began at Berkeley Law, followed by a clerkship for the Honorable Douglas Ginsburg on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. She became a partner at a litigation boutique in 1999 and, in 2009, co-founded Durie Tangri, a premier litigation boutique that later combined with Morrison Foerster in 2023.In addition to her courtroom successes, Daralyn is actively involved in the legal community. She is a board member of the National Women’s Law Center, a past president of the Northern California Association of Business Trial Lawyers, and served as an adjunct professor at Berkeley Law, where she taught civil trial advocacy.Life SciencesDaralyn has decades of experience in the life sciences sector. She spearheaded the enforcement of Genentech’s Cabilly family of patents, which generated billions of dollars in licensing revenue. She served as lead counsel in the Herceptin biosimilar litigation and recently achieved a plaintiff-side jury verdict of $178 million in a patent infringement case involving melanoma therapy.TechnologyIn the tech sector, Daralyn recently won defense jury verdicts for Aptiv (USB hubs), Activision (in the Eastern District of Texas), and Redbubble. She served as lead counsel for Google, defending Google Books from copyright infringement claims. Following extensive litigation on copyright and antitrust issues, Google prevailed on summary judgment, resulting in Daralyn being named an Attorney of the Year by California Lawyer magazine.

Daralyn Durie

Seth Graham is a partner in Morrison Foerster’s Technology Transactions Group and advises clients on a wide range of transactional matters involving technology and intellectual property, including licensing arrangements, technology transfers, outsourcing transactions, development agreements, and other commercial and services arrangements.Seth has over 15 years of experience in the U.S. and Asia advising clients on cross-border IP matters, with a focus on the IT, pharmaceutical, semiconductor and telecommunication industries. Seth regularly counsels clients with respect to software and content licensing arrangements, trademark licenses and branding strategies, outsourcing and cloud computing transactions, and joint development arrangements, as well as on issues regarding open source software, artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain applications. Seth also assists clients with complex patent licensing arrangements and on intellectual property issues relevant to emerging company investments and project finance and development activities. He has represented client such as SoftBank, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Otsuka and Yahoo! Japan, amongst others.Seth also has extensive experience advising on adversarial litigation negotiations and settlements, in- and out-bound licensing arrangements across Asia, and mergers and acquisitions, restructurings, joint ventures and other corporate transactions. Seth provides pro bono legal services to Médecins Sans Frontières and other not-for-profit organizations in connection with establishing and enforcing their intellectual property rights.Seth has been consistently recognized for his work in the technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) space by Chambers Asia-Pacific and The Legal 500 Asia Pacific, and was named as an “Asia Super 50 TMT Lawyer” by Asian Legal Business. Clients comment that Seth has “great negotiation skills” and is their “go to lawyer for IP and cross-border matters” (Legal 500 2024) and that his “service and understanding of our business remains one of main reasons we use Morrison Foerster” (Chambers 2023).  Seth is admitted to practice in New York and California, and is a Gaikokuho-Jimu-Bengoshi in Japan.

Seth M. Graham

Masato Hayakawa is a partner in the Technology Transactions Group of Morrison Foerster’s Tokyo Office. Prior to joining the firm’s Tokyo Office, he practiced in the San Francisco Office for several years. His practice is concentrated on transactions and counseling involving intellectual property, including structuring and negotiating license agreements, technology transfers, adversarial patent litigation settlements, outsourcing arrangements, joint development agreements and other intellectual property matters relevant to technology companies.Masato is also very experienced in the intellectual property aspects of mergers and acquisitions. He advises clients, both emerging and established companies, from a range of industries. For example, Masato has counseled companies in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, semiconductor technology companies, financial institutions, and multinational technology conglomerates. He has extensive experience in cross-border transactions, having worked on major transactions in the United States, Asia, and Europe, and he is fluent in Japanese.The 2021 edition of Chambers Asia-Pacific noted that “In addition to deep experience and unsurpassed knowledge as an IP practitioner, he brings a deal lawyer's approach to the negotiating table.”Masato has provided legal services on a pro bono basis to a number of non-profit organizations such as The Yale Law Journal, Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) of Japan, Lutheran Social Services of Northern California, and HAND (Helping After Neonatal Death). Masato also serves on the Alumni Advisory Board of The Yale Law Journal.Masato received his A.B. degree from the University of California, Berkeley, graduating with highest honors. He earned his J.D. degree from the Yale Law School, where he served as an articles editor of the Yale Journal of International Law and later as managing editor of The Yale Law Journal. Masato is admitted to practice in California and as Gaikokuho-Jimu-Bengoshi in Japan.

Masato Hayakawa

Rich is a nationally recognized intellectual property litigation attorney, with nearly 30 years of experience helping clients protect, enforce, and defend their most valuable IP assets in high-stakes disputes. He has served as global co-chair of the firm’s Litigation Department and spent a decade leading the firm’s Intellectual Property Group, advising clients at the intersection of cutting-edge technology and complex litigation. Rich co-chairs the Semiconductors Industry Group.A registered patent lawyer, former Federal Circuit clerk, electrical engineer, and seasoned trial lawyer, Rich brings a rare combination of technical training and litigation experience to every matter. He represents clients across the full spectrum of intellectual property law, including patent, copyrights, trademark, and trade secret litigation and has handled over 150 IP matters over the course of his career. Rich has tried over a dozen cases to verdict or final award and regularly represents clients in state and federal trial and appellate courts, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and in arbitration proceedings.Rich’s practice spans a wide range of advanced technologies, including software, cryptography, semiconductors, consumer electronics, and medical devices. In addition to litigation, he frequently advises clients on strategic offensive and defensive patent licensing and acquisition issues.Rich earned dual bachelor’s degrees in electrical engineering and economics from Stanford University and received his law degree from Columbia Law School, where he was a James Kent Scholar, a recipient of the Carroll G. Harper Prize, and a moot court editor. During law school, he clerked for the Honorable Sonia Sotomayor, then of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. After graduating, Rich clerked for the Honorable Paul R. Michel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.He maintains an active pro bono practice and is deeply engaged in public service. Since 2014, Rich has served as a Neutral Commissioner on the San Francisco Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Board. He also served two terms as president of the Asian Law Alliance and continues to serve on its board of directors. The organization provides pro bono legal assistance to the Asian and Pacific Islander community in Silicon Valley. Rich is a fellow of the American Bar Foundation.Earlier in his career, Rich tried multiple criminal cases—all to favorable verdicts—while serving with the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office.Outside of his legal practice, Rich is an avid endurance athlete and has completed five Ironman triathlons. His training reflects the same discipline, preparation, and resilience that characterize his approach to complex litigation.<h4>Representative Matters</h4><ul><li>Smartphone Litigation. Member of team that successfully tried a high-profile smartphone case, leading to a jury verdict of over $1 billion.</li><li>Whirlpool Corp. v. TST Water LLC (Eastern District of Texas). Led Whirlpool team that obtained $7.6 million jury verdict and willfulness finding against TST Water in a patent case involving refrigerator water filters.</li><li>Good Technology Corp. v. AirWatch, LLC (Northern District of California). Defended AirWatch against assertions of four patents by a competitor. The case settled after expert discovery.</li><li>Data Speed Technology LLC v. VMware, Inc. (District of Delaware). After every other defendant settled or was dismissed, convinced plaintiff to walk away and dismiss case against client VMware with prejudice.</li><li>Unified Messaging Solutions v. VMware, Inc. (Northern District of Illinois). Represented VMware in a patent infringement suit brought by a non-practicing entity alleging infringement by VMware’s Zimbra webmail product.</li><li>Augme Technologies LLC v. Yahoo!, Inc. (Northern District of California). Represented Yahoo! in a patent infringement suit involving Internet display advertising and media playback. Won summary judgment of non-infringement on Augme’s two asserted patents, and Augme stipulated to infringement of one of Yahoo!’s patents. The case was affirmed on appeal.</li><li>Discovery Communications, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. (District of Delaware). Represented Discovery Communications in a patent infringement suit against Amazon.com alleging infringement by Amazon’s Kindle of Discovery’s patents for e-book reader technology. The case settled after a favorable claim construction ruling.</li><li>Medtronic Spine LLC v. Cozmed, LLC (Northern District of California). Obtained consent judgments of patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation against infringers in a matter involving balloon kyphoplasty.</li><li>Waugh v. Doyle, et al. (Northern District of California). Represented plaintiff in civil rights lawsuit. Court entered substantial monetary judgment in plaintiff’s favor prior to trial.</li></ul>

Richard Hung

Yuichi Inase is a partner of Morrison Foerster Law Offices. Yuichi's practice focuses on a broad range of litigation matters, including commercial and intellectual property litigation and dispute resolution. He is also experienced in corporate matters, including compliance and regulatory issues, with a particular focus on the technology and e-commerce industries.Yuichi is recognized as a “Next Generation Partner” in Japan for Dispute Resolution by The Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2026 and is also ranked in the IAM Patent 1000 2025 for Japan: Litigation.Yuichi earned his B.S. in Engineering and J.D. from the University of Tokyo and worked for two technology consulting companies prior to joining the firm. Yuichi completed his training at the Legal Training and Research Institute of Japan (62nd Trainee). He is a bengoshi admitted to practice in Japan as well as in New York, and is a member of the Tokyo Bar Association.

Yuichi Inase

Scott Llewellyn’s practice focuses on complex litigation in federal and state courts around the country, with an emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes. Over the past decade, he has worked on some of the most significant, high–profile IP cases involving technology for televisions, smartphones, and self–driving cars, relying on 40 years of experience with computer hardware and software. Scott also has significant experience with business divorce cases before courts and arbitrators, involving a mix of trade secret, patent, tort, and contract claims relating to technology development and implementation.Scott also has successfully tried general commercial arbitration and agency matters, briefed and argued various appeals in federal appellate court, and tried more than 20 cases for the Denver City Attorney’s office, most of them jury trials.Scott also has an active pro bono practice, having worked on a variety of criminal and immigration appeals, and having represented Colorado criminal defense and mental health organizations in high–profile suits against the state of Colorado for violations of the constitutional rights of defendants.At MoFo, Scott serves on the board of the Morrison & Foerster Foundation. In the broader legal community, he serves on the boards of the Colorado Lawyers Committee and Drop in the Bucket (a charity that builds wells and sanitation systems in sub–Saharan Africa).After law school, Scott clerked for the Honorable Clarence A. Brimmer, District of Wyoming, and the Honorable Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Ninth Circuit. He was also previously an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center.

Scott F. Llewellyn

Alistair Maughan co-leads Morrison Foerster's European Technology and Commercial Practice. He delivers commercial contracts and technology-based projects for major companies and public sector organizations. He advises on:<ul dir="ltr"><li>Commercial licensing and sales contracts</li><li>Service-based outsourcing transactions</li><li>Technology delivery models, such as cloud and as-a-service platforms</li><li>Contracts for the supply and acquisition of technology equipment</li><li>Key regulatory issues</li><li>Services and software</li><li>Agency and distribution contracts</li><li>Issues and contracts related to e-commerce</li><li dir="ltr">Drafting, negotiating, and advising on technology contracts and issues</li></ul>He advises on the deployment of new technology platforms involving, for example, the internet of things, AI and machine-learning, and blockchain and distributed ledger technology.He also has many years of experience of working alongside our corporate lawyers on the IP, technology and ongoing transitional services aspects of some of the largest technology sector M&A transactions in recent years.In recognition of his deep knowledge in this area, Alistair is recommended in leading independent guides to the legal profession, including Legal 500, Chambers UK, and Best Lawyers in the United Kingdom. Clients comment that he “is incredibly pragmatic, helpful, collaborative and smart” and “brings common sense to the negotiating table”. He “enjoys an excellent reputation as an outsourcing expert and for his deep experience in a wide range of technology issues” and “has a great ability to take a broad view and is proactive in finding legally correct solutions around the discussion points”.Alistair is a member of the Technology Transactions Group and the Global Sourcing Group.

Alistair Maughan

Senior Counsel

Deanne Maynard, a Partner in Morrison Foerster’s Appellate and Supreme Court practice, is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading appellate advocates. She has argued 14 cases before the United States Supreme Court and more than 75 times in appellate courts across the country.In ranking Deanne in Band 1, Chambers USA reports that she is described as a “magnificent and top-notch lawyer” who is “wicked smart.” She is “extremely thoughtful, even-keeled and has a wonderful presence in the courtroom.” Legal 500 calls Deanne “one of the finest advocates in the Supreme Court bar,” remarking that “if she is on your team, great. If she’s on the other side, be ready.”Deanne’s winning Supreme Court arguments involve a wide range of issues and industries, including life sciences (Sandoz v. Amgen), intellectual property (MedImmune v. Genentech), antitrust (Pacific Bell v. linkLine), financial services (Ransom v. FIA Card Services), and bankruptcy (RadLAX v. Amalgamated Bank). In Sandoz v. Amgen, the Supreme Court ruled for her client in a closely watched case involving the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, which provides an approval path for biosimilars. Law360 named Deanne to its exclusive list of <a href="http://media2.mofo.com/documents/171212-mvp-deanne-maynard.pdf" target="_blank">Appellate MVPs</a> for this “big victory,” dubbing her a “Legal Lion” three separate times for her work on appeals in this case. LMG Life Sciences also named Deanne Appellate Litigator of the Year.Deanne argues complex, high stakes cases in courts of appeals nationwide. Clients turn to Deanne for crisp, clear briefs and exceptional oral advocacy. Her appellate wins run a gamut of issues from arbitration to antitrust, class actions to contracts, copyright to Commerce Clause, infringement to invalidity, and securities law to statutory interpretation. Clients praise her as “an incredible oral advocate, very prepared and formidable” (Chambers USA), and “a tireless advocate with sterling client skills” (Legal 500).Deanne has particular experience in the Federal and Ninth Circuits. She has argued more than 45 appeals in the Federal Circuit, including wins for both patentees and defendants on a wide range of technologies. Chambers USA ranked Deanne in Band 1 for Intellectual Property Appeals, describing her as “renowned for her track record in bet-the-company disputes.” She also serves as Chair of the Federal Circuit’s Advisory Council, which is a conduit between the Court and the public. In the Ninth Circuit, her many wins include a decision from the en banc Court holding large parts of a California statute unconstitutional as well as a panel decision vacating a $60 million jury verdict.Deanne is annually recommended as a leading lawyer by Chambers USA, Chambers Global, Legal 500 US, and Best Lawyers in America. She is Immediate Past-President of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, an invitation-only organization recognizing distinguished appellate lawyers. Deanne is also a Master in, and Past President of, the Coke Appellate Inn of Court.Deanne is a leader within Morrison Foerster as well, chairing its partner compensation committee and serving on the firm’s leadership team.Before joining the firm, Deanne served as an Assistant to the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice for five years. She previously was a partner at another major law firm.After law school, Deanne clerked two Terms on the United States Supreme Court, one for Justice Stephen Breyer and another for Justice Lewis Powell (Ret.) and Justice John Paul Stevens. Before that, Deanne clerked two years for Judge Stanley Harris on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.Deanne graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, where she was an editor of the Harvard Law Review. She earned a B.A. in English, with distinction, from the University of Virginia.<h4>Supreme Court Arguments</h4><ul><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/170426-sandoz-v-amgen" target="_self">Sandoz v. Amgen</a> (00:17): Involving the Supreme Court’s first foray into the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/120423-radlax-v-amalgamated-bank" target="_self">RadLAX v. Amalgamated Bank</a> (25:46): Whether a debtor can sell a secured asset free and clear without permitting the lienholder to credit-bid</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/081208-pacific-bell-v-linkline" target="_self">Pacific Bell v. linkLine</a> (18:38): Whether Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act permits a price squeeze claim in the absence of a duty to deal</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/061004-medimmune-v-genentech" target="_self">MedImmune v. Genentech</a> (17:38): Whether a patent licensee must breach a license agreement before seeking a declaration of patent invalidity</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/101004-ransom-v-fia-card-services" target="_self">Ransom v. FIA Card Services</a> (26:34): Involving when a debtor without lease payments may take a car-ownership deduction</li><li>EC Term of Years Trust v. U.S.: Whether the federal tax code relegates a trust to a wrongful levy action as its exclusive remedy</li><li>Marshall v. Marshall: Involving the scope of the probate exception to federal jurisdiction</li><li>U.S. v. Olson: Involving the federal government’s sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act</li><li>Wilkinson v. Austin: Whether the procedures governing placement of prisoners in supermax prison satisfied due process</li><li>Greenlaw v. U.S.: Involving the power of the court of appeals in the absence of a cross-appeal</li><li>Dean v. U.S.: Whether the accidental discharge of a firearm during a robbery results in a mandatory minimum prison term</li><li>Carcieri v. Salazar: Involving the Secretary of the Interior’s authority to take land into trust for Indians</li><li>Boulware v. U.S.: Whether a profitless corporation’s diversion of funds to a shareholder was nontaxable</li><li>Watson v. U.S.: Whether trading drugs for a firearm was “using” a firearm “during and in relation” to a drug trafficking crime</li></ul><h4>Representative Appellate Arguments</h4><ul><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/241113-novartis-v-torrent" target="_self">Novartis v. Torrent</a> (00:00) (Fed. Cir.): Revived the validity of Novartis’s foundational patent protecting its blockbuster drug Entresto®</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/231207-lynwood-investments-cy-limited-v-maxim-konovalov" target="_self">Lynwood Investments v. Konovalov</a> (16:43) (9th Cir.): Successfully defended dismissal of the vast majority of claims against F5 Network</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/210903-in-re-cirba" target="_self">In re Cirba</a> (25:53) (Fed. Cir.): Successfully defeated attempt to revive a jury’s patent infringement verdict against VMware</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/170426-phigenix-v-genentech" target="_self">Phigenix v. Genentech </a>(11:21) (Fed. Cir.): Secured noninfringement judgment for Genentech</li></ul><ul><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/181018-zabriskie-v-fannie-mae" target="_self">Zabriskie v. Fannie Mae</a> <a href="http://youtu.be/Cz_Hp0VIkYs">(Video)</a> (0:00) (9th Cir.): Won reversal for Fannie Mae of a Fair Credit Reporting Act judgment</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/161108-washington-university-v-wisconsin-alumni" target="_self">Washington University v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation</a> (0:42) (3d Cir.): Obtained reversal for Washington University in suit for royalties due under contract with WARF</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/191202-nevro-v-boston-scientific" target="_self">Nevro v. Boston Scientific</a> (00:10) (Fed. Cir.): Won reversal of district court judgment of invalidity for indefiniteness</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/180514-aviation-v-huerta" target="_self">National Business Aviation Assoc. v. Huerta</a> (28:34) (D.C. Cir.): Successfully defended the City of Santa Monica against a challenge to its settlement with the FAA about its municipal airport</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/200601-cr-bard-v-angiodynamics" target="_self">C.R. Bard v. Angiodynamics</a> (00:29) (Fed. Cir.): Won reversal of district court judgment of noninfringement, no willfulness, and invalidity, reviving client’s infringement case on three patents</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/190409-flores-v-ups" target="_self">Flores v. UPS & Pocino Foods v. UPS (Consolidated)</a> (<a href="http://youtu.be/eas0RAExOME" target="_blank">Video</a>) (13:43) (9th Cir.): Secured judgment for UPS on two putative RICO and breach-of-contract class actions about its Next Day Air services</li><li>Residential Capital v. Federal Housing Finance Agency (2d Cir.): Successfully obtained a remand in a case stemming from the ResCap bankruptcy</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/171005-basf-argument" target="_self">BASF v. Johnson Matthey</a> (0:17) (Fed. Cir.): Won reversal of an invalidity ruling against patentee BASF, reviving its patent claims</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/190419-holl-v-us-district-court" target="_self">Holl v. U.S. District Court</a> (<a href="https://youtu.be/ilT3hbMCTQ0" target="_blank">Video</a>) (13:32) (9th Cir.): Defeated a mandamus petition against UPS, successfully defending its arbitration provision containing a class-action waiver</li><li>Interactive Digital Software Association v. St. Louis County, Missouri (8th Cir.): Successfully argued a First Amendment challenge to an ordinance regulating video games</li><li>In Re: Tremont Securities Law (2d Cir.): Secured dismissal for a major accounting firm of a putative class action regarding a Madoff-related fund</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/141216-estate-of-graham-v-sothebys" target="_self">Estate of Graham v. Sotheby’s</a> (30:46) (9th Cir.) (en banc): Won invalidation under the Commerce Clause of parts of a California artist resale royalty law</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/111206-atm-fee-antitrust-litigation" target="_self">In re ATM Fee Antitrust Litigation</a> (17:20) (9th Cir.): Prevailed in a putative nationwide antitrust class action against one of the largest U.S. ATM networks</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/131205-augme-technologies-v-yahoo" target="_self">Augme Technologies v. Yahoo!</a> (21:49) (Fed. Cir.): Secured a noninfringement judgment for Yahoo! in a suit involving Internet display advertising</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/170830-lummi-nation-argument" target="_self">Lower Elwha Klallam Indian Tribe v. Lummi Nation</a> (<a href="http://youtu.be/OILs47RhSjM" target="_blank">Video</a>) (00:03) (9th Cir.): Won a reversal for the Lummi Nation, reclaiming its historic treaty rights</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/141201-warsaw-orthopedic-v-nuvasive" target="_self">Warsaw Orthopedic v. NuVasive</a> (17:44) (Fed. Cir.): Obtained vacatur of a jury’s $101 million patent damages award</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/150504-momenta-v-amphastar" target="_self">Momenta v. Amphastar</a> (02:55) (Fed. Cir.): Successfully argued for a patentee that conduct was unprotected by the Hatch-Waxman Act safe harbor</li><li><a href="/resources/video-audio/120605-neurovision-medical-products-v-nuvasive" target="_self">Neurovision Medical Products v. NuVasive</a> (00:00) (9th Cir.): Obtained vacatur of a jury’s $60 million trademark verdict</li></ul>

Deanne E. Maynard

Brian Matsui is a partner in 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 cases in federal and state appellate courts throughout the country, winning appeals involving commercial disputes, securities litigation and enforcement, government contracts, 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 has recently gone six for seven 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 15 of his last 17 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. Chambers USA ranks him in its Intellectual Property: Appellate category, The Legal 500 US recommends him for Appellate Litigation, and the National Law Journal named him one of its 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.Brian serves on the board of directors of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. 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 also served as an appellate lawyer representative for the Ninth Circuit. 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="/resources/video-audio/260219-snipr-technologies-ltd-v-rockefeller" 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="_self">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="/resources/video-audio/260219-advanced-voice-recognition-systems-inc" target="_self">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/260219-william-paulus-v-ocera-therapeutics" 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/260219-kurtz-v-costco-wholesale-corporation" target="_self">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 the Dodd-Frank Act’s industry-wide sanctions on securities professionals for certain securities violations. </li></ul>

Brian Matsui

Dan is an intellectual property litigator and trial lawyer with more than two decades of experience litigating patent, trade secret, and copyright matters in federal courts around the country and at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). He is co-lead of the firm’s ITC Working Group and an editor of the <a href="/itc" target="_self">MoFo@ITC</a> guide to Section 337 investigations. Dan has led litigation and trial teams in complex IP cases. Most recently, he led the trial team in a confidential arbitration involving complex semiconductor fabrication technology. He was first-chair trial counsel at an ITC trial defending chipmaker Renesas against Broadcom’s patent infringement allegations, which resulted in a complete victory for Renesas before the judge, the Commission, and the Federal Circuit. In the closely-watched Waymo v. Uber autonomous vehicle trade secret litigation, Dan helped lead the technology team defending Uber against Waymo’s claims. He also served as trial counsel at a patent jury trial that resulted in a verdict in favor of client Microscan against competitor Cognex. He managed the trial team for Oracle in its IP lawsuit against Google over the Android operating system, and managed the trial team for Novell in a jury trial that resulted in a complete win against SCO’s claims concerning the ownership of the UNIX copyrights.     The technologies in his cases have been diverse, including semiconductor fabrication, integrated circuits, instruction set architectures, self-driving vehicles, LiDAR, the Java and Android software platforms, the UNIX operating system, IEEE 802.11 wireless networking devices, MEMS gyroscopes and accelerometers, web advertising platforms, rare earth magnets, and medical devices.

Daniel P. Muino

Brian Nash serves as Practice Group Chair of Morrison Foerster’s global Intellectual Property Litigation Group, and Co-Chair of the firm’s cross-disciplinary Intellectual Property Group. With over 200 cases litigated in Texas alone, Brian brings a wealth of experience to high-stakes disputes in some of the nation’s most active intellectual property jurisdictions. His practice extends nationally, encompassing district courts, the PTAB, the ITC, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Brian has represented Fortune 50 clients in matters involving patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and copyrights.Brian’s recent work exemplifies his ability to deliver outstanding results for clients facing complex, high-value IP disputes. Among his notable achievements, he secured a complete summary judgment win in a case where the opposing party sought over $800 million in damages by attempting to capture royalties across an entire product ecosystem. In another matter, he obtained a highly favorable settlement in a 10-patent case, leveraging an aggressive early motion strategy to reach resolution. Brian has also advanced client interests as plaintiff’s counsel in a major competitor-v.-competitor case. He has delivered several dispositive wins that resolved major cases without any damages paid, further establishing his reputation as highly sought-after counsel for leading technology companies. Additionally, Brian recently won dismissal with prejudice in a case based on a motion to dismiss for patent invalidity under Section 101, underscoring his skill in legal writing and strategic advocacy.Brian’s technical acumen is grounded in his experience as a registered patent attorney and his engineering background. He is known for his ability to analyze and simplify complex technical issues, providing strategic counsel across a broad spectrum of technologies, including semiconductors, programmable logic devices, software, blockchain, e-commerce, digital media, video games, virtual reality, wireless standards, video streaming, aluminum alloy composition, container fabrication, hydrocarbon exploration, search marketing, geolocation, encryption, image processing, organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays, and liquid crystal displays. Clients value his analytical approach and his capacity to translate intricate technical concepts into effective legal strategies.Widely recognized as a leader in the Texas intellectual property community, Brian has played a pivotal role in shaping the region’s legal landscape. He founded the Honorable Lee Yeakel IP Inn of Court—the first IP-focused Inn of Court in Texas—and currently serves as its president. His commitment to professional service is further demonstrated through his roles as a board member and past president of the Austin Chapter of the Federal Bar Association and as a past president of the Austin Intellectual Property Law Association.<h4>Representative Experience</h4><ul><li>Won a dispositive claim construction ruling that resulted in a dismissal following a Markman hearing before Judge Albright on behalf of a Fortune 50 semiconductor company on a patent related to field programmable gate arrays.</li><li>Won a final written decision holding all claims unpatentable and denying patent owner’s motion to amend in an inter partes review for a Fortune 50 semiconductor company on a patent related to field programmable gate arrays.</li><li>Representing Cimarex Energy Co. in defending against a multi-patent case involving e-fracking technologies.</li><li>Advising Anheuser-Busch in an instituted derivation proceeding related to aluminum alloy composition technology that is pending at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.</li></ul>

Brian Nash

Chair, IP Litigation Practice

Max Olson is a partner in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group and Litigation Department. Max’s practice includes all aspects of dispute resolution, with special emphasis on patent litigation, international arbitration, trade secret litigation, sports litigation, and adversarial patent license negotiations. Max served as the chair of the Tokyo office Litigation Department from 2006 to 2013 and managing partner of the Los Angeles office from 2004 through 2006.Max led the firm’s litigation team on behalf of Fujitsu Semiconductor Ltd. (“FSL”) in obtaining an order from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California compelling arbitration of Cypress Semiconductor’s state court claims against FSL for alleged breach of contract, interference with contract, indemnity, and unfair competition in Tokyo, Japan, under the rules of the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association (FSL v. Cypress Semiconductor Corp., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97711 (N.D. Cal. June 5, 2023)).Max led the firm’s patent litigation teams on behalf of JOLED Inc. in the global enforcement of its OLED display patents against Samsung’s Galaxy phones through parallel litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Case No. 6:20-cv-559) and the Japan Customs Office. Max also led the firm’s patent litigation teams defending infringement actions brought by Samsung Display and/or its affiliate, Intellectual Keystone Technology, against JOLED and its customers, including ASUSTeK Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer Int’l, in ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1257 (In re Certain Organic Light Emitting Diode Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same) and in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Case Nos. 6:21-cv-00017 and 6:21‑cv‑00053).Max led the firm’s litigation and arbitration teams on behalf of FSL in a global dispute with Cypress Semiconductor over the intellectual property rights in and ownership of thousands of photomasks used in the manufacture of semiconductors. Max defeated Cypress’s motion for injunctive relief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a significant victory for FSL (Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. FSL, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32907 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2020)) and filed counterclaims against Cypress in an arbitration before the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association.Max led the firm’s litigation team on behalf of Mitsui Chemicals in trade secret litigation involving irrigation systems in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida and won a motion to dismiss the unfair trade practices, unfair competition, fraud, and conspiracy claims brought against Mitsui Chemicals (Developmental Techs. LLC v. Mitsui Chems., Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64630 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 15, 2019)).Max represented U.S. Olympic gymnast Paul Hamm before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) in Switzerland, the world’s highest court for resolving sports disputes, in the highly publicized dispute over the gold medal in the men’s individual all-around event in the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens. A panel of three CAS arbitrators rejected the appeal filed by the bronze medalist, Korean gymnast Yang Tae‑Young, and held unanimously that Mr. Hamm should keep his gold medal. Max also led the firm’s arbitration team on behalf of a mixed martial arts fighter and obtained an award from the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association releasing the fighter from an unfavorable contract with his promoter.Max has also represented Fujitsu, FSL, Socionext, Konica Minolta, TDK, Yamaha, Micron Memory Japan, Advantest, Sega, Buffalo, and other major corporations in various adversarial patent license negotiations against some of the world’s largest patent holders.Max is a longtime member of The Tokyo IP American Inn of Court and served as its President from 2021 through 2023. He is also a registered gaikokuho-jimu-bengoshi and a member of the Daini Tokyo Bar Association, the Litigation Section and Intellectual Property Law Section of the American Bar Association, and the American Intellectual Property Law Association.Max is widely recognized as one of Japan’s leading lawyers by many of the world’s foremost independent legal directories, including Chambers Global, Chambers Asia-Pacific, The Legal 500, IAM Patent 1000, The Best Lawyers in Japan, Managing Intellectual Property, Benchmark Litigation: Asia-Pacific, Lexology Index (formerly Who’s Who Legal), and IAM Global Leaders. Clients describe Max as “a visionary legal practitioner and scholar who represents the best in his field in the Tokyo and Japan markets for dispute resolution and IP-related matters.”Max received his M.A. and B.A. magna cum laude from Harvard University and his J.D. cum laude from the University of Michigan.

Max Olson

Catherine Polizzi, known as a pioneer in Patent Prosecution + Strategy law, is a deeply experienced lawyer who is highly regarded by clients and competitors alike. Her intellectual versatility combined with incisive, pragmatic counseling and business acumen is the hallmark of her practice. Catherine has the unique experience of working with both startups and emerging companies as well as well‑known, established global 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 and polypeptides; nucleic acids; precision medicine including precision oncology; diagnostics; cell therapy including T cell and NK cell technologies, such as chimeric antigen receptors; drug formulation technologies; drug delivery technologies such as nanotechnologies; therapeutic and prophylactic vaccines; microfluidics; drug screening systems; AI solutions for life sciences including drug discovery and development platforms; polynucleotide therapeutics such as siRNA; amplification and detection technologies; genetic screening; sequencing technologies including next-generation sequencing; regenerative medicine; spectroscopy; surgical imaging technologies; 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.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. 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>Ranked in four different Chambers categories for IP and Life Sciences 2011–2025</li><li>Recognized as a Hall of Fame lawyer by LMG Life Sciences for Patent Prosecution and Patent Strategy & Management since 2018</li><li>Recognized as Patent Star by Managing IP for 2025</li><li>Recommended as a leading lawyer by The 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><h4>Representative Experience</h4><ul><li>Genentech, the world’s first and most successful biotechnology company, has relied on Catherine’s strategic patent counseling and prosecution services for its most difficult and challenging patent matters for nearly 15 years. 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 patent litigation support and advisement.</li><li>10x Genomics, a biotechnology company developing forefront gene sequencing technology used in scientific research, turns to Catherine to serve as lead patent counsel related to in situ and spatial assay platforms for cellular and subcellular identification of cell and biomarker diversity in tissues, including gene expression, gene sequencing, RNA profiling, and related reagents, panels, hardware, and software analysis tools.</li><li>Codexis, a biotechnology company that specializes in enzyme engineering, focusing on improving sustainability and cost-efficiency of manufacturing in the pharmaceutical industry, including in the manufacture of oligonucleotides and small molecule drugs, relies on Catherine for developing Codexis’s complex IP strategy. She has provided critical advice in management of their intellectual property portfolio, including strategic consideration of patent application filings, and patent risks to their planned commercial operations, including freedom to operate.</li><li>Juno Therapeutics has relied on Catherine for patent strategy and prosecution from its very beginning. Juno is one of the best-funded startups 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.</li><li>Dewpoint Therapeutics engaged Catherine to lead its patent strategy from the very beginning. Dewpoint is on the cutting edge of drug discovery, with technology relating to condensate biology, a new and paradigm‑shift area of drug development. Catherine led the IP strategy and due diligence for its 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 its collaboration with Merck to evaluate a novel approach for the treatment of HIV.</li><li>Frontier Medicines, a clinical-stage precision medicine company advancing treatments for genetically defined patient populations in oncology and immunology, has entrusted all aspects of patent strategy and portfolio development for its pipeline of small molecule therapeutics to Catherine.</li><li>Insitro, a multibillion-dollar startup pharmaceutical drug company, turned to Catherine to develop its global IP strategy. The company is at the forefront of advancing AI and data-driven drug discovery and development, and trusted Catherine to manage the company’s portfolio.</li><li>Sonoma Biotherapeutics, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company that is developing cell therapies that use engineered regulatory T cell therapies to treat serious autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, called on Catherine to direct its patent strategy and development.</li><li>Additional representative clients include clinical-stage and startup companies, such Aimmune Therapeutics, Alpine Immune Sciences, Botanical Solution, Cartography Biosciences, CohBar, Corner Therapeutics, Cytokinetics, Dynavax Technologies, Enveda Therapeutics, Frazier Life Sciences, GOA Therapeutics, Immunome, Indapta Therapeutics, Larkspur Biosciences, Lyndra Therapeutics, Maze Therapeutics, Myst Therapeutics, Nanoprobes, Ollin Biosciences, Passkey Therapeutics, Prelude Therapeutics, Sana Biotechnology, Sangamo Therapeutics, Seagen (formerly Seattle Genetics), Sirenas, Syntis Bio, Tacit Therapeutics, TARIS Biomedical, The Immune Co., Turnstone Biologics, and Volastra Therapeutics.</li></ul><h5>Aided by Catherine’s leadership and guidance developing IP protection for high-value technology, the following companies were involved in the following high-value transactions:</h5><ul><li>The $4.9 billion cash acquisition of client Alpine Immune Science by Vertex Pharmaceuticals.</li><li>Alpine Immune Sciences’ $48 million Series A financing and subsequent $90 million merger with Nivalis Therapeutics, resulting in a publicly traded company, as well as Alpine Immune Sciences’ $91 million private placement.</li><li>The $2.6 billion acquisition of client Aimmune Therapeutics by Nestlé Health Science.</li><li>The $74 billion acquisition of Celgene Corporation by Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS).</li><li>The $1.1 billion development collaboration with BMS 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>Celgene Corporation’s $9 billion acquisition of client Juno Therapeutics and earlier $2.9 billion acquisition of client Abraxis BioScience.</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>Dewpoint Therapeutics’ partnership with Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, with a deal value up to $480 million and $150 million Series C financing, $77 million Series B financing, and $60 million Series A financing.</li><li>Enveda Therapeutics Inc.’s $130 million raised in Series C financing.</li><li>Frontier Medicines’ $55 million collaboration with AbbVie to develop molecules against hard-to-drug targets.</li><li>Frontier Medicines’ $80 million Series C financing, $88.5 million Series B financing, and Series A Preferred Stock financing of $67 million.</li><li>Indapta Therapeutics’ $22.5 million financing to advance clinical trials of innovative cancer and autoimmune treatments and $50 million Series A financing.</li><li>Johnson & Johnson’s acquisition of TARIS Biomedical, with a focus on transforming the treatment of bladder cancer.</li><li>Lyndra Therapeutics’ $60.5 million Series C financing and $55 million Series B financing.</li><li>Myriad Genetics’ $375 million acquisition of Counsyl, Inc.</li><li>Syntis Bio’s $33 million Series A financing.</li><li>Sonoma Biotherapeutics’ collaboration with Regeneron worth over $100 million.</li><li>The $14 billion acquisition of client Medivation by Pfizer, as well as the previous $225 million Pfizer investment in Medivation.</li><li>The $43 billion acquisition of client Seagen by Pfizer.</li><li>Turnstone Biologics’ acquisition of Myst Therapeutics.</li></ul>

Catherine Polizzi

Bita Rahebi is a nationally recognized trial lawyer sought after by the world’s most innovative technology companies to lead bet-the-company intellectual property disputes, including complex patent litigation. She is a member of the firm’s Semiconductor Industry Group and previously co-led the firm’s global IP Litigation Group and cross-disciplinary Intellectual Property Group.Bita is trusted for her ability to simplify complex technologies for judges and juries, a skill sharpened over 25 years of litigating patent, trade secret, copyright, and complex commercial disputes. She leads matters before federal and state trial courts, the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) across a wide range of technologies including semiconductors, software, consumer electronics, medical devices, and standard essential patents (SEPs).Her victories include complete wins as lead trial lawyer, the invalidation of multiple patents, and successful results for plaintiffs in high-stakes matters. Earlier in her career, Bita prosecuted cases at the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office, securing guilty verdicts in every criminal jury trial she handled.Bita is a recognized leader in intellectual property litigation. Chambers USA highlights her work in technology-sector disputes, with clients describing her as “razor-sharp,” “client-focused,” and a litigator who “excels at trial and litigation strategy.” She has been named a Forbes Top 250 Lawyer and Top Women Lawyer, repeatedly recognized by the Daily Journal as a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer, honored as a Women Leader in Tech Law by The Recorder, and listed multiple times on IAM’s Strategy 300 and Patent 1000. She is also a fellow of the American Bar Foundation.Beyond her litigation practice, Bita advises technology clients on strategic transactional matters, including patent licensing and negotiations. She has also played an active role in the broader legal community. Bita is the past president of the Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association. She also served as a Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference Lawyer Representative. Bita serves as an editorial board member of The Intellectual Property Strategist.Bita earned her B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley, where 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

Vice Chair

Aaron is the co-chair of the Interactive + Digital Media Group and former chair of the firm’s Technology Transactions Group. He advises clients on a wide range of complex transactions involving intellectual property and technology, including structuring and negotiating strategic licensing, development, collaboration, procurement, and distribution arrangements.Aaron’s practice focuses on advising both established and emerging companies in data- and technology-intensive sectors, with a particular emphasis on AI and interactive and digital media (including social platforms, AR/VR, gaming, and streaming). He also regularly works with clients in autonomous vehicles, Healthtech, Fintech, Adtech, and broader software and consumer technology markets. His work often sits at the intersection of product, data, IP, and commercial relationships, particularly in connection with AI-driven and platform-based business models and emerging technologies.He also maintains an active practice counseling companies on branding and marketing, trademark licensing, and content-related transactions, as well as the intellectual property aspects of mergers, acquisitions, asset spinoffs, and private equity investments.He has represented leading technology companies such as OpenAI, Meta, ElevenLabs, Visa, Autodesk, General Motors, Honda, and Rivian, among others.Aaron has been recognized by numerous publications for his work on market-defining technology transactions and is currently ranked by Chambers USA for “Technology Transactions.”Aaron also serves as co-editor of Socially Aware, the firm’s award-winning newsletter and blog devoted to the law and business of social platforms, and regularly publishes on various IP and technology-related topics. He is a sought-after speaker on new and emerging areas of law and is a frequent presenter and panelist at conferences and legal services programs.In addition to his active practice, Aaron regularly provides pro bono assistance to various nonprofit and charitable organizations such as Common Sense Media and the Starlight Children’s Foundation. He is a member of the board of directors of California Lawyers for the Arts.While in law school at the University of California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law, Aaron served as executive editor of the California Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif. Following law school, Aaron served as a law clerk to the Honorable William H. Orrick and the Honorable Martin J. Jenkins, both United States District Judges for the Northern District of California.

Aaron P. Rubin

Tessa Schwartz has an active practice counseling companies on intellectual property issues, and negotiating complex intellectual property and commercial agreements. She advises on a range of strategic transactions, including key patent licenses and acquisitions, technology procurement agreements, and complex development, collaboration, joint-venture and distribution deals. Tessa also regularly advises companies on the IP aspects of their M&A transactions.In addition to maintaining an active practice and working with clients on a daily basis, Tessa is co-chair of the firm’s Technology Industry Group, founder and co-chair of the firm’s Artificial Intelligence Group and previously served as co-chair of the global Transactions Department.Tessa advises clients primarily in technology and data intensive sectors, representing artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, machine learning, software, SaaS, cloud computing, hardware, consumer electronics and products, social media, Internet, mobility and wireless, space and satellites, e-commerce, advertising, healthcare, fintech, transportation, semiconductor, and other companies. Tessa’s M&A experience includes advising Autodesk, BlackBerry, Fortive, Honeywell, Salesforce, Uber, Unilever, Unity, Walmart, and others on the IP aspects of strategic transactions. Tessa provides clients with prelitigation and litigation advice. She frequently advises executives and senior management on strategic business, legal and commercial issues, including the structuring of transactions, risk management and contract compliance. She also counsels clients with respect to a wide variety of IP issues, including patent exhaustion and implied licenses, standing and standards, the protection of data and other trade secrets and the development and distribution of open-source software.In addition to her transactional expertise, Tessa’s litigation background includes representing clients in arbitration, as well as in state and federal courts in such areas as antitrust, false advertising, unfair competition, breach of contract, securities, trademark, copyright and trade secret law. Her litigation experience includes complex, multidistrict and class action litigation, as well as appellate advocacy.Tessa has been ranked in Chambers and Legal 500, with clients describing her as, “one of the best attorneys I've ever worked with.” Tessa has been recognized by Chambers USA 2022 as being highly experienced in the field of technology and intellectual property transactions. Clients have commented on Tessa as having "...the ability to translate complex topics into what's necessary to get a deal done. She does a good job of making our technology accessible”. Further, Tessa "ticks all of the essential boxes, timely, efficient, knowledgeable and helpful, but she really stands out by taking time to learn our business and our products so she can give practical and actionable advice. Tessa helps us focus on key issues and balance risks to make choices."Tessa’s pro bono efforts have included work for The Biomimicry Institute, Goodwill, Common Sense Media, Business for Social Responsibility, The World Wildlife Fund, Build Change and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB). She also provides IP advice to a variety of cultural, media and arts organizations; and other assistance for nonprofits. She recently received the Wiley W. Manuel Award for Pro Bono Legal Services from the State Bar of California.Tessa received her B.A. magna cum laude from Harvard College in 1991. In 1996, she earned her J.D. from the University of California at Los Angeles, where she was elected to the Order of the Coif.Tessa served as global managing partner of Morrison Foerster from 2016 to 2022 and previously served as co-chair of the firm’s Technology Transactions Group.

Tessa Schwartz

Mr. Schwartz concentrates his practice on the representation of companies in business transactions and counseling involving intellectual property and technology, including licensing, development agreements, distribution and commercialization activities, joint ventures, outsourcing, and other services arrangements. He was the founding co-head of Morrison & Foerster’s Intellectual Property Group and has served as the firm’s managing partner.Mr. Schwartz is particularly active on transactional and counseling matters relating to computers (including hardware and both open source and proprietary software), communications equipment (including smartphones and other wireless communications devices, internet television, satellites, and other communications infrastructure), semiconductors and other electronic devices, electronic commerce, and other advanced information technology. He has represented clients such as Accenture, Altera, Autodesk, Mozilla, Netflix, Palo Alto Networks, Panasonic, Red Hat, Softbank, Sprint Nextel, Visa, Whirlpool, VMware, and Yahoo, among others.Mr. Schwartz is a frequent presenter on information technology and intellectual property issues. For example, he has lectured in the MBA program at Oxford University, and was a visiting fellow of Oxford’s Centre for Socio-Legal Studies. He also served as an adjunct instructor at Stanford Law School and lectured at the University of California (Boalt Hall) School of Law, University of Southern California Computer Law Institute, Licensing Executives Society, and American Intellectual Property Law Association.Mr. Schwartz received his B.A. degree, with high honors, from Amherst College in 1976. He studied Japanese language and history from 1976 to 1977 at Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan, and then worked in Tokyo and Hong Kong as a reporter and editor for the Asian edition of The Wall Street Journal from 1977 to 1980. He received his J.D. degree, with honors, in 1983 from the University of Chicago Law School, where he was an editor of The University of Chicago Law Review. Following law school, he served as a law clerk to Judge John D. Butzner, Jr., United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. He joined Morrison & Foerster in 1984 and became a partner of the firm in 1990.Representative Matters<div id="scoped-content"><ul><li>Autodesk in the technology and intellectual property aspects of various transactions.</li><li>Dexcom, a San Diego-based medical device manufacturer that markets a continuous glucose monitoring device for use by people with diabetes, in a patent licensing agreement with Abbott.</li><li>SoftBank on intellectual property aspects of its $1 billion investment in OneWeb for low Earth orbit satellites to provide global broadband access.</li><li>Palo Alto Networks in its patent cross-license with Juniper Networks relating to (among other things) network security technology. </li><li>Panasonic in its disputes and settlements with Qualcomm regarding patents relating to mobile communications equipment. </li><li>Qwest in a variety of intellectual property and information technology matters, including the intellectual property and technology aspects of Qwest’s sale of its Dex directory publishing business in a $7.05 billion leveraged buyout, Qwest’s agreements with IBM and Hewlett-Packard for the establishment and outsourcing of Internet services facilities, and Qwest’s strategic relationship with BellSouth. </li><li>Red Hat in its agreement with Microsoft for offering Red Hat Enterprise Linux on Microsoft’s Azure cloud computing infrastructure.</li><li>Sprint Nextel in its agreements with Qualcomm and other companies in connection with the development, licensing and deployment of technology for the next generation of Sprint Nextel’s wireless telecommunications services. </li><li>SUSE (formerly Novell) in the formation of Open Invention Network, a company formed by SUSE, IBM, Philips, Red Hat, Sony, NEC and Google to promote the Linux operating system by using an innovative model for patents and in SUSE’s dispute with The SCO Group concerning Unix-related copyrights. </li><li>Visa in its agreement with a major investment bank to establish a customized payments platform to provide differentiated experiences for merchants and cardholders.</li><li>VMware and its AirWatch subsidiary in a patent license agreement with Good Technology relating to mobile device management (MDM). </li><li>Yahoo and SoftBank, the largest shareholders of Alibaba Group (the leading PRC-based online and mobile commerce company), in the intellectual property aspects of the carve-out and restructuring of Alipay and Alibaba’s other financial services businesses.</li></ul></div>

William Schwartz

Senior Of Counsel

Tim Chen Saulsbury is a partner in the Intellectual Property Litigation group, based in the San Francisco office.His exceptional track record has earned him consistent recognition from leading publications.  IAM Patent 1000 describes Tim as a “formidable lead trial attorney,” highlighting wins for Zoom and others.  The Daily Journal labeled him one of the “Top Intellectual Property Lawyers” in California, as well as one of California’s top 40 lawyers under the age of 40.  Bloomberg Law named Tim one of the top 40 lawyers in the country under 40, and Law360 named him one of the top 6 IP lawyers in the nation under 40.  Tim also was recognized by Benchmark Litigation (on its 40 & Under Hot List) and by The Legal 500 (for Copyright, Patent Licensing, Patent Litigation, and Trade Secrets).Tim’s recent wins include:<ul><li>In the 6-month period from March 2025 to August 2025 alone:</li><ul><li>On behalf of a leading American cybersecurity company, Tim argued and won summary judgment of noninfringement in a multi-patent case in which the patentee sought hundreds of millions in damages, earning recognition by the Daily Journal as one of the biggest defense wins of 2025.</li><li>On behalf of an eCommerce client, Tim argued and won another summary judgment of noninfringement that disposed of all three patents asserted by a competitor.</li><li>A complete non-infringement verdict on behalf of a leading videogame company in a patent infringement suit involving one of the most popular videogames of the past decade, earning “Legal Lion” honors from Law360 and recognition in The American Lawyer’s Litigator of the Week column.</li><li>A clean sweep plaintiff’s verdict in a Delaware patent infringement trial involving eCommerce marketing technology.</li></ul><li>As lead defense counsel in a hotly contested AI patent litigation, Tim secured an early, decisive victory when the Court granted a motion to dismiss and found all of the plaintiff’s claims patent-ineligible.  </li><li>As lead counsel for Zoom in a six-patent case involving end-to-end encryption technology, Tim defended against claims seeking $100M+ annually and amounting to $1.5B+ over the life of the patents. After winning successive dismissal motions, Zoom moved to dismiss the entire case with prejudice. The Court issued a tentative ruling indicating that it was inclined to grant the motion, and the case promptly resolved.</li><li>As lead counsel for the country’s largest integrated healthcare system, Tim secured a complete summary judgment victory in a $900M+ trade secret case involving wearable medical device technologies, earning him Litigator of the Week runner up honors in The American Lawyer.</li><li>A complete defense verdict in a competitor patent trial involving USB technology that powers Apple CarPlay. Tim’s cross-examination of the lead inventor was later described as a “climactic moment” and potentially “a big reason why the jury would later reject Microchip’s case.”</li><li>In the months leading up to that trial, Tim put together a streak of five complete walkaways as lead counsel for Zoom, Atlassian, and Brightcove.</li></ul>Tim also maintains an active pro bono docket, serving as full scope counsel in a range of cases, including FTCA, First Amendment, wrongful termination, and Section 1983 matters.Tim serves on Morrison Foerster’s Board of Directors and previously co-chaired the firm’s Global Intellectual Property Litigation group. Prior to joining MoFo, Tim was a partner at a national trial boutique, where he served on the firm’s management committee.

Timothy Chen Saulsbury

Yuki is a partner of Morrison Foerster Law Offices. He has more than 25 years of experience in litigation and dispute resolution, including disputes relating to commercial transactions, product liability, real estate, and computer system development, as well as intellectual property, including patents, trademarks and copyrights.Yuki primarily focuses on representing international clients in Japanese litigation and technology transactions. He also handles IP licensing work and regulatory matters involving complex compliance issues, including security and personal information breaches, pharma and medical device regulation, and violations of product safety standards issued by the Japanese government.Yuki frequently lectures on intellectual property rights, e-commerce, privacy (protection of personal information), and entertainment law at the Daini Tokyo Bar Association, Keio Law School, and specialized training colleges. He serves as a deputy chairman of the Daini Tokyo Bar Association’s Study Group of Intellectual Properties.In 2018, Yuki drafted the “Data Contract Guidelines for Agricultural Sectors” for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) of Japan, which was published in December 2018. In July 2019, he was appointed as a committee member to establish “Contract Guidelines in Using Artificial Intelligence for Agricultural Sectors” for the MAFF. Yuki was also appointed a special member (mediator) of the “Dispute Resolution Board for Telecommunication Business Entities” at the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication (MIAC) of Japan.Yuki is ranked in Japan for TMT and Dispute Resolution (2026), and for Intellectual Property (2024) in The Legal 500 Asia Pacific, and has also been recognized for Intellectual Property Law and International Business Transactions in The Best Lawyers in Japan since the 2013 edition.

Yukihiro Terazawa

Michael (Mike) Ward is co-chair of the firm's Life Sciences + Healthcare Group and Food + Agriculture Group.Life SciencesFor his work across the life sciences sector, Mike was named San Francisco Biotechnology Lawyer of the Year by Best Lawyers in America in 2020 and is recommended for his patent strategy and prosecution practice in LMG Life Sciences. He also led the team that was named 2022 Patent Management and Strategy Firm of the Year at the 2022 LMG Life Sciences Americas Awards.Food + AgricultureRecognized as “one of the world’s foremost plant and agriculture IP lawyers,” Mike manages a wide range of intellectual property issues related to plants and plant products. He and his team advise clients on plant and plant utility patents; licensing agreements for plant IP; litigation in U.S. state and federal court and before the International Trade Commission; and regulatory approvals from the USDA, FDA, and EPA for gene edited and genetically engineered plants.Patent Strategy + ProsecutionMike is a Legal 500 US Hall of Fame lawyer for patent prosecution and is consistently named one of the leading IP lawyers by Managing Intellectual Property, Chambers USA and Chambers Global, and IAM Patent 1000.Mike works closely with many clients to develop and manage their patent portfolios. He helps clients identify, monitor, and assess the infringement risks of third-party patents. He also assists clients in preparing both offensive and defensive patent portfolios, with a particular emphasis on drafting patent applications that will be utilized in licensing and in litigation efforts.IP Due DiligenceFor venture capitalists seeking to invest in early- and mid-stage companies, underwriters involved in IPOs, and companies seeking to acquire or merge with other companies, Mike has managed extensive IP diligence. His work includes assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of patent portfolios, evaluation of freedom to operate issues, and strategic recommendations for maximizing the value of patent portfolios going forward.Mike also works closely with the IP Litigation Group on various litigation matters including patent interferences to determine the first-to-invent and patent re-examination work and actively participates in both mediation and arbitration proceedings on behalf of clients in the life sciences and food and agriculture areas.He is a frequent lecturer and speaker. Among numerous speaking engagements, Mike is the IP instructor at the UC Davis Licensing Academy and founded Morrison Foerster’s annual Harvard Biotechnology Club Fall Patent Law Course.Mike holds a Ph.D. in plant physiology (biochemistry) and an M.S. in agronomy from the University of California, Davis; a B.S. in biology from the University of California, Berkeley; and a J.D. from Golden Gate University School of Law. He was a post-doctoral fellow in plant molecular biology at the Harvard Medical School and the Department of Molecular Biology at Massachusetts General Hospital, where he worked on the Arabidopsis genome project.

Michael Ward

Mark Whitaker is a leading member of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation practice and has more than 35 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 (ITC), 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 (AIPLA), Mark was elected to their prestigious Fellows membership in 2019. He is a frequent speaker at the American Bar Association, AIPLA, the Practising Law Institute, the Minority Corporate Counsel Association, and at numerous CLE events all over the country.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. Drawing on this background, he currently leads the firm’s MoFoVets affinity network. Following his military service, he began his private practice legal career as a commercial litigator before concentrating on IP and technology litigation.

Mark Whitaker

Chie Yakura is a partner in the Litigation Department of Morrison Foerster Law Offices. She represents both non-Japanese and Japanese corporations in a wide range of complex litigation matters with an emphasis on intellectual property, technology transactions and trade secrets, antitrust/competition law, as well as cross-border contractual and commercial disputes and product liability matters. Chie also focuses on anti-corruption and compliance matters and conducts internal investigations. She has handled cases in a variety of industries, including software, hardware, consumer electronics, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, transportation, real estate and manufacturing.Chie received her LL.B. from Kyoto University and graduated from the Legal Training and Research Institute of the Supreme Court of Japan (53rd Trainee). Chie also received an LL.M. from Columbia Law School and an LL.M. in international business law from the University of London, London School of Economics and Political Science.Chie is a bengoshi, admitted to practice in Japan. She is also a benrishi (patent attorney) in Japan and admitted in New York.Chie is a member of the Dai-Ichi Tokyo Bar Association, the Japan Patent Attorneys Association and the American Bar Association.