PRACTICE AREASIntellectual Property Litigation
Inter Partes Review
- University of Texas School of Law (J.D., with honors, 1994)
- University of Texas at Austin (B.S., Chemical Engineering Honors Program, 1990)
LICENSES & ADMISSIONS
- Licensed in Texas and California
- United States Courts of Appeal for the Federal, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits
- United States District Courts for the Eastern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas
- United States District Courts for the Central and Northern Districts of California
- Named Super Lawyer, 2016 – 2021
- Named 5th best performing attorney representing patent owners, Patexia Inc. IPR Intelligence Report
- Texas Bar Foundation, Life Fellow
- American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust Law
- Austin Bar Association
- Austin Intellectual Property Law Association
Z-Tel Communications, Inc. v. SBC Communications, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Prior to joining the firm, partner Christopher Goodpastor represented a competitive telephone provider as plaintiff in antitrust litigation against a large Regional Bell Operating Company. The matter settled favorably for a confidential sum.
Bandspeed, Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., et al. (W.D. Tex.)
Represented plaintiff hardware company in a patent litigation relating to Bluetooth communications against numerous integrated circuit manufacturers. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.
Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., K.G. v. Apple, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex., PTAB, Fed. Cir.)
Represent patent owners in case involving allegations of patent infringement related to high data rate, device-independent information transfer against multiple cell phone manufacturers. Trial court denied motion to transfer venue and appeal court denied mandamus. Navigated the filing of twenty-three (23) IPRs of data transfer technology patents by nine (9) accused infringers, securing non-institution of many petitions and resulting in survival of patentable claims asserted in litigation. Obtained $5.9 million jury verdict against one defendant; other defendants settled favorably.
Encore Media Metrics LLC v. Google Inc., et al. (261st Judicial District, Travis County, Texas)
Represented web analytics provider as plaintiff in trade secret litigation relating to internet advertising analytics against a large competitor. The matter settled favorably for a confidential sum.
eWatch, Inc. v. Apple Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.)
Represented plaintiff hardware and software company in patent litigation relating to image capture, storage, and transmission against numerous manufacturers of camera phones. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.
In re Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation (E.D.N.Y.)
Represent plaintiff class of dental practices and laboratories against the three largest dental supply and equipment distributors in the United States, alleging the distributors fixed price margins, pressured manufacturers to boycott competitors, and agreed not to poach each other’s employees. District court approved cash settlement of $80 million on behalf of class members.
In re German Automotive Manufacturers Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.)
Represent plaintiff in putative indirect purchaser class action on behalf of vehicle purchasers against Audi, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, Volkswagen and related entities, alleging that these German vehicle manufacturers coordinated on costs, prices, suppliers, technical development, and other competitive aspects in violation of both federal and state antitrust laws and consumer protection statutes.
Bandspeed, Inc. v. Sony Electronics, Inc., et al. (W.D. Tex.)
Represented plaintiff hardware company in patent and antitrust litigation relating to Bluetooth communications against 45 hardware manufacturers and a standards setting organization. The matter settled favorably for confidential sums.
Silicon Services Consortium, Inc., et al. v. Applied Materials, Inc. (W.D. Tex.)
Prior to joining the firm, partner Christopher Goodpastor represented providers of refurbished microchip manufacturing tools as plaintiffs in antitrust litigation against a large tool manufacturer. The matter settled favorably for a confidential sum.
Infinity Computer Products, Inc. v. Toshiba America Business Solutions, Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal., E.D. Pa., D. Del., E.D.N.Y., & E.D. Ky.)
Represent patent owner in multiple litigations enforcing patents related to methods for transferring print and scan data between a fax machine and computer.
Thomas C. Sisoian v. International Business Machines Corp. (W.D. Tex.)
Represented plaintiff software company in action for misappropriation of trade secrets relating to adaptive object-model software by former employee, resulting in a favorable settlement on behalf of client after court denied summary judgment in favor of defendant.
Inter Partes Review re Data Transfer Technology
Navigated the filing of twenty-three (23) IPRs of data transfer technology patents by nine (9) accused infringers, securing non-institution of many petitions and resulting in survival of patentable claims asserted in litigation.