Jeffrey Liang

Jeffrey Liang is a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm's Silicon Valley office.

Areas of Practice

Jeffrey combines his engineering background and litigation experience to provide clients with an integrated, strategic approach to IP litigation. He has represented companies in all phases of patent disputes, including pre-suit investigation, negotiations, discovery, depositions, oral hearings, and trials. His practice includes district court litigation, IPR proceedings, and Section 337 investigations before the International Trade Commission, and he has represented clients in cases involving a wide range of technologies including cryptography, online payments, artificial intelligence, streaming media, databases, computer architecture, networking, wireless communications, and video games. He has experience with several industry standards including TLS, PCIe, and IEEE 802.3 and 802.11.

In addition to IP litigation, Jeffrey advises clients on technology transactions, including licensing agreements and negotiations.

Prior to attending law school, Jeffrey was an engineer at Intel Corporation.

Experience

• Representing leading streaming service provider in 15+ IPRs against Broadcom for patents related to video compression, DRM, adaptive streaming, web services, distributed computing, and virtual machines.
• Represented leading streaming service provider in 2021 in a Central District of California patent dispute and a corresponding IPR. Obtained institution of the IPR, after which Patent Owner surrendered all claims and dismissed the district court action.
• Representing leading semiconductor company in 2 IPRs against IP Value Management subsidiary involving microcontrollers, FPGAs, and other programmable devices, with both IPRs instituted and all challenged claims found invalid in Final Written Decisions.
• Represented leading software provider in 2021 in Western District of Texas litigation involving 3 asserted patents before obtaining favorable dismissal.
• Represented leading streaming service provider in 7 instituted PTAB challenges relating to compression technology. To date over 85 claims have been found unpatentable across 5 patents.
• Represented leading semiconductor manufacturer in multiple IPR challenges concerning 802.11 and Bluetooth technology that were instituted and all asserted claims found invalid.
• Represented a leading streaming provider of music in 4 IPR proceedings that settled shortly after the filing of the IPRs.
• Represented a leading streaming service provider of music in Delaware litigation. Case settled favorably.
• Represented leading online gaming company in an IPR and appeal that invalidated all asserted claims of a patent related to video game design.
• In Fall of 2017, received a dismissal of a Central District of California lawsuit without any payment for a leading ride-share provider prior to even formally responding to the Complaint.
• Represented a leading medical device company in multiple IPR proceedings involving a competitor.
• Represented leading sporting goods company in the Central District of California litigation and obtained dismissal before responding to complaint after sending Rule 11 letter.
• In Fall of 2016, received a dismissal of a Delaware lawsuit without any payment for a leading ride-share provider prior to even formally responding to the Complaint.
• In Spring of 2016, represented a leading financial services company defending against a claim of patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas. Prior to having to file an Answer, received a walkaway dismissal with prejudice for the client.
• In 2016-2018, defended leading data storage company in patent litigation against competitor in the International Trade Commission, Southern District of New York, and IPR proceedings.
• Defended leading telecommunications company in the Eastern District of Texas in a case involving TLS and elliptic curve cryptography.
• Defended leading semiconductor manufacturer and software company accused of patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas in a case involving TLS and RC4 encryption.
• Defended telecommunications company in competitor litigation in the Western District of Wisconsin.
• Defended leading networking company in a patent infringement case in the Northern District of Illinois, leading to a major RAND decision on IEEE 802.11.
• Defended leading networking company before the International Trade Commission in a dispute involving IEEE 802.3, standards-related defenses, and RAND issues.
• Defended leading cell-phone manufacturer accused of patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas in a case involving RF transceivers.
• Defended leading software company accused of patent infringement in the District of Delaware in a case involving networking and database services.
• Represented a leading vendor of RFID microchips for pets against a competitor in a Federal Circuit appeal.
• Advised various technology companies in patent licensing negotiations.

Honors

Ranked as one of the most active attorneys representing petitioners, Patexia IPR Intelligence Report, 2021-2022

Articles

Game Counsel: Gaming and Esports Blog Posts

• "Too Many Bites at the Apple?," July 26, 2022
• "Hello Again, Worlds: A Failed Gaming IPR Leads to § 101 Success," May 21, 2021

• "ITC Threat for Gaming Companies Grows with PTAB Discretionary Denials," January 15, 2020

• "Clash of Game Companies: Lessons Learned from GREE and Supercell Dispute" September 22, 2020

Law of the Level Blog Posts

• "Converting an IPR Loss into a District Court Win," May 8, 2019 

Media Mentions