Nicholas A. Brown

• Certain Filament Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same (II); Inv. No. 337-TA-1220: Lead counsel in the defense of Satco in a suit brought at the International Trade Commission by complainant, the Regents of the University of California at Santa Barbara, over four patents relating to LEDs. The trial was conducted from Aug. 30-Sept. 3, 2021. Also serving as lead counsel in parallel district court litigations on the same patents which have been stayed pending the resolution of the ITC investigation.
• Satco Products, Inc. v. The Regents of the University of California: Lead counsel for petitioner Satco in four inter partes review proceedings before the PTAB against The Regents of the University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB) relating to LEDs. Successfully invalidated all claims of two patents which had been asserted by UCSB. Currently awaiting final determinations on two additional petitions for inter partes review.
• Satco Products, Inc. v. Signify North America Corporation, et al.: Lead counsel for Satco in a patent infringement action filed against Signify North America Corp. and Signify Holding B.V. in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleging infringement of three patents directed to light bulbs containing LED filament and Gimbal LED recessed lights. Judge Albright has granted Satco’s motion to dismiss seven counterclaims filed by Signify.
• Satco Products, Inc. v. Seoul: Lead counsel for petitioner Satco in inter partes review proceedings before the PTAB against Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd. and Seoul Semiconductor Co. Ltd. Successfully invalidated all challenged claims in U.S. Patent No. 9,343,631, all challenged claims in U.S. Patent No. 10,134,967, and one challenged claim in U.S. Patent No. 8,860,331.
• Satco Products, Inc. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., et al.: Lead counsel for Satco in a patent infringement action filed against Seoul Semiconductor Inc. and Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Satco asserts that Seoul infringes three patents owned by Satco relating to LED technology.
• Certain Robotic Vacuum Cleaning Devices And Components Thereof Such As Spare Parts. Representing iLife in ITC investigation involving iRobot patents related to robotic vacuums.
• Certain Height-Adjustable Desk Platforms And Components Thereof. Represented Loctek in ITC investigation involving Varidesk patents related to adjustable desk mechanisms.
• Swagway v. ITC. Representing Segway and Ninebot in appeal from ITC investigation.
• Gonzalez v. Tagged & Gonzalez v. New Life Ventures. As lead counsel for Tagged and New Life Ventures, won judgment of invalidity after trial in E.D.Tex. in patent litigation relating to digital labels for websites.
• EFF v. Personal Audio. As lead counsel for EFF, won judgment invalidating Personal Audio’s “podcasting” patent after a trial before the Patent Trials and Appeal Board.
• Prolifiq v. Veeva. As lead counsel, represented Prolifiq in patent and trade secret litigation related to software for managing regulated communications for pharmaceuticals and medical devices.
• Wildcat IP v. Pokémon, et al. As lead counsel, represented Pokémon in patent litigation relating to electronic trading card systems.
• Walker Digital v. MySpace, et al. As lead counsel, represented LinkedIn, MySpace and Tagged against patents asserted against social networks’ use of "friend" relationships.
• Teva Women's Health v. Mylan, Teva Women's Health v. Lupin, and related matters. Represented Teva at trial and in subsequent appeal regarding patents covering Seasonique®, as well as in a set of five other related ANDA cases involving patents covering Seasonique®, LoSeasonique® and Cenestin®.
• Global Ground Automation v. Orissa, et. al. Represented Global Ground Automation at bench trial in E.D.Tex. involving patent relating to software for ground transportation.
• Core Wireless v. LG. Representing LG in patent litigation involving technology related to standards for cellular telephones.
• Joao Bock v. Charles Schwab, et. al. Won dismissal with prejudice of 41 of 43 claims for Charles Schwab in patent litigation involving financial services.
• Fotomedia v. Tagged, et al. As lead counsel, represented Tagged in patent litigation relating to social networks’ use of technology for displaying, uploading, and managing photos.
• Beneficial Innovations v. Demand Media, et al. As lead counsel, represented Demand Media in patent litigation relating to Internet advertising.
• Henry Huang v. Caltech, Applera, et. al. As trial counsel, won a complete defense judgment for Applera after a bench trial involving fraud and inventorship claims regarding foundational patents for automated DNA sequencing.°
• ASM v. Genus. Won summary judgment of non-infringement for Genus, and won Federal Circuit affirmance of that judgment, in patent litigation involving atomic layer deposition and chemical vapor deposition technology.°
• Applied Materials v. Podlesnik. Won preliminary injunction for Applied Materials in trade secret case against a senior executive who resigned to join a direct competitor.°
• Samsung v. Tessera. Trial counsel for Samsung at jury trial in N.D.Cal. involving patents relating to semiconductor packaging technology.°
• Semitool v. Applied Materials. Trial counsel for Applied Materials at jury trial D. OR. involving patents relating to advanced copper metallization in semiconductor manufacturing.°
• Won summary judgment of invalidity of seven of nine independent claims in one of the first decisions after KSR, representing a consumer electronics developer in patent litigation relating to audio and video media.°
• Invalidated all asserted claims in reexamination proceedings while representing Microsoft, Yahoo! and another consumer electronics developer in patent litigation relating to digital media. °
• Applera v. Roche. Represented Applera in patent and contract dispute involving foundational polymerase chain reaction (PCR) patents.°
• Unites States ex rel. MJ Research v. Applera. Won Ninth Circuit appeal for Applera affirming dismissal of case alleging fraudulent acquisition and use of DNA sequencing patents.°
• Conceptus v. Hologic. Represented Conceptus in patent litigation asserting foundational patents for medical implants allowing reversible sterilization.°
• Neothermia v. Rubicor. Represented Neothermia in patent litigation concerning minimally invasive breast biopsy devices.°
• Applied Biosystems and Celera Genomics v. Amersham Pharmacia Biotech and Molecular Dynamics. Represented Applied Biosystems and Celera Genomics in multiple patent infringement actions relating to DNA sequencing products.°
• Applied Materials, Inc. v. ASM International, N.V., et al. Represented Applied Materials in patent litigation involving multiple aspects of semiconductor manufacturing technology.°
• Applied Materials v. AG, AST, AG v. Applied Materials. Represented Applied Materials in related patent litigations concerning semiconductor manufacturing tools used for rapid thermal processing (RTP).°
• Novadigm v. Marimba and Marimba v. Novadigm. Represented Marimba in two patent infringement actions involving automated software distribution and updating technology.°
• Lam Research v. Deshmukh. Represented Applied Materials and Dr. Deshmukh in defense of trade secret misappropriation claims.°
• Lam Research v. Annapragada. Represented Applied Materials and Dr. Annapragada in defense of trade secret misappropriation claims.°

°The above representations were handled by Mr. Brown prior to his joining Greenberg Traurig, LLP.

• Listed, The Best Lawyers in America, Litigation - Patent, 2018-2024
• Listed, IAM magazine, "IAM Patent 1000," Litigation, 2012-2020, 2022-2023
• Listed, Super Lawyers magazine, Northern California Super Lawyers, 2015-2019