Matt Berkowitz is a partner in Shearman & Sterling’s Litigation practice. His practice focuses on patent litigation in federal district courts and the International Trade Commission (ITC), as well as post-grant patent proceedings in the US Patent and Trademark Office. Mr. Berkowitz has experience across a broad spectrum of technologies, including consumer electronics, computer networking, memory systems, LEDs, various vehicle systems, aircraft components, and software.

Mr. Berkowitz 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.” Most recently, he was recognized by the Euromoney Legal Media Group as a “Rising Star” in copyright and trademark.

• 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 appeals for Airbus before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, wherein the Board affirmed the rejection 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.
• 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.
• Representing Elpida (current subsidiary of Micron Technology) 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 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).
• Representing US Endodontics in multiple inter partes review and post-grant review proceedings concerning methods of manufacturing nickel-titanium endodontic instruments.
• Representing Apple in a four patent litigation concerning dynamic random access memory in the Central District of California.
• 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).
• Representing Guidance Endodontics in multi-patent ITC investigation concerning endodontic instruments that settled favorably. In the Matter of Certain Endodontic Instruments (ITC).