James R. Batchelder

James R. Batchelder's 35-year career includes appearances in U.S. federal district courts, before the U.S. International Trade Commission and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, and representing clients such as Emerson Electric, Godo Kaisha IP Bridge, NetApp, Teradyne and Collision Communications.

He also a member of the firm's governing policy committee and is a past managing partner of Ropes & Gray's Silicon Valley and San Francisco offices.

"I was drawn to [IP law] because I knew I would always be learning -- both about new technologies and about changes in the law as the law tried to catch up to those technological changes," he said.

In a recent significant matter, he represented Emerson Electric in a complex international dispute involving Smart Wireless products. His victories are widespread, achieving success in various legal venues, including the ITC, the United States Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, among others.

"In addition to multiple findings of non-infringement, these efforts have resulted in findings that over 125 claims across 12 SIPCO patents are unpatentable and rulings indicating that dozens more SIPCO patents are similarly invalid," Batchelder said.

In addition, Batchelder obtained highly-favorable settlements for his clients in two patent infringement actions against Nokia and Ericsson on the eve of trial in the Eastern District of Texas. The litigations concerned Nokia's infringement of four patents by Nokia's LTE and WCDMA base stations and Ericsson's infringement of two of the four patents by Ericsson's LTE base stations.

Batchelder also successfully represented NetApp in a patent-based ITC investigation filed by Proven Networks.

"We achieved an early summary disposition win for NetApp in a patent-based ITC investigation filed by Proven Networks," he explained. "Proven, a non-practicing entity, alleged that NetApp, an industry leader in providing storage management solutions, violated Section 337 based on its alleged practice of one patent directed to resource allocation in cellular networks."

"In all of these cases, we needed to fight for the truth, battling well-funded and tenacious adversaries," Batchelder continued.

When asked about trends, he added: "IP litigation is globalizing, with more plaintiffs filing multiple suits in a variety of international courts."