Matt Berkowitz is a partner in the Litigation practice. His practice focuses on patent litigation in federal district courts and the International Trade Commission (ITC), as well as post-grant proceedings in the US Patent and Trademark Office. Matt has experience across a broad spectrum of technologies, including consumer electronics, memory systems, hybrid vehicles, pre-collision vehicle systems, aircraft components, and pharmaceuticals.

Matt has been named one of the “Top 40 under 40 Intellectual Property Lawyers” by the American Society of Legal Advocates as well as a 2015 New York Metro Rising Star by Super Lawyers. From 2016 - 2019, Benchmark Litigation has recognized Mr. Berkowitz in its “Under 40 Hot List.”

• Lead counsel to Price f(x), a SaaS pricing solution company, in multiple ongoing competitor litigations involving claims of trade secret misappropriation, patent infringement, copyright infringement and unfair competition. Vendavo, Inc. v. Price f(x) AG et al. (N.D. Cal. and N.D. Ill.)
• Lead counsel to musical.ly in a 2-patent litigation; Mr. Berkowitz won a motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice on the grounds that the asserted patents are invalid as patent ineligible. Talent Broker Technologies LLC v. musical.ly, Inc. (C.D. Cal.)
• Lead counsel to STMicroelectronics in a case brought by HTC Corp. seeking defense and indemnification for a patent litigation brought by CyWee Group Ltd.; Mr. Berkowitz won a motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, and an agreement by HTC not to seek leave to amend after Mr. Berkowitz filed a sanctions motion. CyWee Motion Group Ltd. v. STMicroelectronics, Inc. (W.D. Wash.)
• Representing Airbus before the Federal Circuit in an appeal from an inter partes reexamination. Mr. Berkowitz argued the appeal, which resulted in a precedential opinion in Airbus’s favor. Airbus S.A.S. v. Firepass Corp. (Fed. Cir. July 17, 2015). Mr. Berkowitz also argued several related appeals wherein the PTAB affirmed rejections of all asserted claims. Firepass v. Airbus (E.D.N.Y)
• Lead counsel to Toyota in five inter partes review proceedings. Toyota’s petitions were granted on all 50 combined claims across the five proceedings for which review was requested (P.T.A.B.)
• Representing Toyota in multiple cases originally involving 24 patents. Multiple patents were dismissed before claim construction and dozens of asserted claims were held unpatentable following inter partes review decisions. Toyota also won transfer of the case to the Eastern District of Michigan, and was ultimately successful in getting all remaining claims dismissed. American Vehicular Sciences LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp. (E.D. Tex.; E.D. Mich.)
• Representing Elpida (current subsidiary of Micron Technology) and its customers in an eight patent semiconductor memory litigation involving district court actions and an ITC investigation, which was successfully settled after summary determination briefing and prior to a hearing. Intellectual Ventures v. Elpida (D. Del., W.D. Wash., ITC)
• Representing US Endodontics in district court litigation and post-grant review proceedings concerning methods of manufacturing nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. During a preliminary injunction hearing, Mr. Berkowitz cross-examined the plaintiff’s expert, who admitted that he had lied about having a Ph.D. degree. The Court subsequently ruled for Mr. Berkowitz’s client on the motion. Mr. Berkowitz also helped invalidate all asserted claims in the PTAB. Dentsply Int’l, Inc. v. US Endodontics, LLC (E.D. Tenn.)
• Representing Sony as a complainant in a seven patent ITC investigation concerning mobile telephones that settled favorably at the end of fact discovery. In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Modems (ITC)
• Represented calling card company Rubard LLC in a successful summary judgment argument that the sole asserted patent is invalid as patent-ineligible. Stanacard v Rubard, LLC, et al. (S.D.N.Y.)
• Representing Toyota in a litigation relating to vehicle telematics, which has been successfully stayed pending inter partes reexamination. In all three reexaminations, all asserted claims stand rejected. Fernandez v. Toyota (C.D. Cal.)
• Representing Sony in litigation resulting in summary judgment of invalidity based on lack of written description, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on appeal. Trans Video Electronics v. Sony Electronics (N.D. Cal.)
• Representing GE Healthcare (GEH) in a 38-day false advertising trial wherein the court rejected plaintiff Bracco’s $4 billion damages claim against GEH and held that Bracco had itself engaged in false advertising. Bracco Diagnostics v. Amersham Health (D.N.J.)
• Representing Toyota in district court actions and an ITC investigation, in which Toyota avoided the injunction on hybrid cars sought by plaintiff. Paice v. Toyota (E.D. Tex., ITC)