Photo of Yasamin  Parsafar

Yasamin Parsafar

Associate

Education

  • J.D., University of California, Davis, 2012, Order of the Coif
  • B.S., University of California, Davis, 2009, highest honors
  • California
Overview
Experience

Overview

Yasamin Parsafar is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm's San Francisco office.

Areas of Practice

Ms. Parsafar represents clients across a wide range of technologies, including biotechnology, hard disk drives, telecommunications, wireless communications, data storage, online security, semiconductors, and GPS. She has experience in pre-litigation analysis, managing fact discovery, expert discovery, taking and defending depositions, preparing witnesses for depositions and trial, and drafting dispositive motions.

Ms. Parsafar maintains an active pro bono practice, including full scope representation of clients in domestic violence, unlawful detainer, and immigration matters. She also drafts and negotiates contracts for non-profit organizations. She was awarded the State Bar of California Wiley W. Manuel certificate for outstanding Pro Bono Service and recognized by San Mateo County Legal Aid Society for providing outstanding Pro Bono services to low-income residents in 2016.

Experience

Prior Matters:

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of entire case and invalidation of 2 out of 4 asserted patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101, after other two patents were withdrawn by plaintiff in response to institution of IPR.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 summary judgment motion for lack of patentable subject matter per 35 U.S.C. § 101 filed.

Samsung v. NVIDIA (E.D. Va.): Member of team that served as lead trial counsel for the Lead trial counsel representing 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.