This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Sarah J. Guske

| Apr. 17, 2019

Apr. 17, 2019

Sarah J. Guske

See more on Sarah J. Guske

Baker Botts LLP

Sarah J. Guske

Guske has degrees in electrical engineering and physics.

“The degrees help with getting over the initial shock of learning new technology for each case,” she said. “It would be overstating the matter to say that my 20-year-old electrical engineering degree makes me any kind of expert, but the shared vocabulary does come in handy.”

When authentication services company TeleSign Corp. sued client Twilio Inc., a cloud communications platform, for allegedly infringing four patents on two-factor authentication technology for websites, the plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction that would have prevented Twilio from selling many of its products.

Fighting back, Guske persuaded a judge to deny the injunction and transfer the case to the Northern District of California, where U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of San Francisco invalidated all four patents on the grounds that they claim nothing more than abstract ideas.

“We’ve moved to dismiss, and I expect a ruling in our favor soon,” Guske said. TeleSign Corp. v. Twilio Inc., 18-CV03279 (N.D. Cal., filed June 4, 2018).

In an appellate case, Guske argued for client Cisco Systems Inc. before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit over patent infringement claims by Capella Photonics Inc., which makes wavelength selective switches. The patents involve optical routing components used in telecommunication networks.

Guske argued to preserve the win she attained after filing inter partes review applications at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board, which invalidated Capella’s patents. Capella appealed, but the Federal Circuit panel affirmed in February 2018 shortly after the oral argument.

“Always nice to get a summary affirmance,” Guske said.

Capella then sought U.S. Supreme Court review; the justices denied its cert petition in November. Capella Photonics Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., 16-2394 (Federal Circuit, filed July 27, 2016).

Some of Guske’s other clients include Bright House Networks LLC, recently acquired by Charter Communications Inc., as well as Verimatrix Inc. and Dropbox Inc.

“It’s the perfect marriage of the technology I learned to love as an undergraduate,” Guske said, “and the debate I came to enjoy at law school and when I got into practice. I’m sure my significant other would agree that I am a debater by nature.”

— John Roemer

#352016

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com