- J.D., University of California, Davis, 2012, Order of the Coif
- B.S., University of California, Davis, 2009, highest honors
Yasamin Parsafar is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm's San Francisco office.
Areas of Practice
Ms. Parsafar’s practice focuses on protecting her clients’ intellectual property rights through counseling, enforcement and litigation defense.
Counseling, Prosecution and Enforcement. Ms. Parsafar counsels clients on intellectual property acquisition, protection and enforcement strategies. She assists with matters before the USPTO and the PTAB, including trademark prosecution and patent inter partes review proceedings. She also conducts IP due diligence for corporate transactions and advises on, negotiates and drafts terms involving intellectual property rights in commercial contracts, including research and development agreements.
Litigation. Ms. Parsafar enforces and defends her clients’ rights in complex commercial litigation, involving patent, trademark, trade dress, copyright, false advertising and contract disputes. She has experience in pre-litigation analysis, managing fact discovery, expert discovery, taking and defending depositions, preparing witnesses for depositions and trial, and drafting and arguing motions.
Ms. Parsafar’s patent litigation experience includes non-infringement, invalidity, and claim construction analysis, summary judgment, and other pre-trial briefings. She has litigated cases involving standard-essential patents and FRAND licensing issues.
Ms. Parsafar represents clients in industries ranging from hospitality to semiconductors. She is familiar with technologies including hard disk drives, wireless communications, data storage, online security, GPS, and biotechnology.
TriPlay, Inc. v. WhatsApp Inc.: A member of the legal team for WhatsApp in a 4-patent case relating to cross-platform messaging systems filed in the District of Delaware. After favorable claim construction ruling conducted early in the case prior to discovery, obtained dismissal of entire case and invalidation of 2 out of 4 asserted patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101, after other two patents were withdrawn by plaintiff in response to institution of IPR.
Guzik Technical Enterprises, Inc. v. Western Digital Corp.: Served on the Western Digital legal team in the Northern District of California in a patent case relating to testing equipment for hard disk drive heads. Successfully narrowed the case from a start of 62 patent claims and 14 trade secrets to 12 patent claims and 0 trade secrets, including obtaining summary judgment of invalidity on some claims and summary judgment of non-infringement on other claims.
Delphix Corp. v. Actifio, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) (D. Mass): One of a team of attorneys who represented Actifio in a nine-patent case involving two jurisdictions. Case settled favorably after Delphix’s patents were invalidated in IPR proceedings.
Create Ads v. Endurance Int’l Gp. & Constant Contact (D. Del.): On the team that served as lead counsel for companies sued by NPE. Case favorably settled after team filed summary judgment motion for lack of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Samsung v. NVIDIA (E.D. Va.): Member of team that served as lead trial counsel for the defendant in a multi-jurisdiction suit. Jury found that none of the asserted claims were infringed and that the sole asserted system claim was also invalid. Litigation subsequently favorably settled with no remedy against NVIDIA.
RPost v. Constant Contact (E.D. Tex.): Member of team that served as lead counsel for national email marketing company in case brought by NPE. Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.