Aaron Morris

I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting.

Aaron Morris — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Aaron Morris is an associate in the Silicon Valley (Redwood Shores/Redwood City, CA) office of Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP (RJLF), where his practice centers on intellectual property litigation with an emphasis on patent disputes. His docket is concentrated in data center infrastructure technology — cooling and thermal management, atmospheric/air-recirculation control, controllable fluid partitions, and power control — arising from the Hewlett-Packard/HPE-origin patent portfolio now held by Valtrus Innovations Ltd. and Key Patent Innovations Ltd. He has also worked on enterprise software/licensing patents (e.g., cluster license-gating claims asserted against Kubernetes users) and appears in at least one networking/consumer electronics matter (Malikie Innovations Ltd. v. D-Link Corp., E.D. Tex.). His technical background is aerospace/mechanical-adjacent: a B.S. in aerospace engineering from MIT and pre-law engineering work at Northrop Grumman on unmanned aircraft systems.

On side preference, the tracked record is one-sided: 8 of 9 appearances are plaintiff-side, and the single "defendant" entry (Vertiv Corp. v. Valtrus Innovations Ltd.) is Valtrus defending a supplier's declaratory-judgment action, not representation of an operating-company infringer. In practice he litigates for a patent monetization/assertion entity — Valtrus is a wholly owned subsidiary of Key Patent Innovations Ltd., an Irish NPE holding former HPE assets — bringing infringement actions against data center operators (Digital Realty, Equinix, NTT Data/CyrusOne, Verizon, SAP, DataBank, TierPoint, Evoque/Dawn Acquisitions, EvoDC, DataBank, Netrality, and others) in E.D. Tex. and elsewhere, and defending the resulting IPRs and DJ actions. Firm materials describe his experience as supporting both accused infringers and patent owners, including pre-filing investigations, but his tracked filings skew heavily toward the patent-owner side.

Firm context and notable matters. He joined RJLF from Shearman & Sterling as part of a four-lawyer Silicon Valley patent trial team (with partners Matthew Berkowitz and Patrick Colsher and associate Yue (Joy) Wang), and he has since been counsel in the Valtrus campaign that was centralized in In re Valtrus Innovations Ltd. Patent Litigation, MDL No. 3190 (E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap), covering eleven-plus actions across multiple districts. He is identified as trial counsel in Valtrus v. Dawn Acquisitions LLC d/b/a Evoque Data Center Solutions and Valtrus Innovations v. EvoDC, LLC, and as counsel/of counsel/of record in the Digital Realty, DataBank, NTT, and Netrality matters. Verifiable outcomes in that campaign include the January 23, 2025 joint dismissal with prejudice of the Digital Realty-related cases (a settlement-type resolution, not a verdict), and an adverse ruling in N.D. Cal. dismissing Valtrus's later-filed Google action for impermissible claim-splitting — a decision that turned on Valtrus/Key Patent standing and damages-period issues and is not attributable to Morris individually. No jury verdicts or Federal Circuit opinions in his own name surfaced in this search.

PTAB/IPR and credentials. He is a registered patent attorney (USPTO Reg. No. 80,821) and appears in PTAB proceedings as backup counsel on patent-owner teams (e.g., the updated mandatory notice in IPR2023-00196 naming him alongside RJLF's Matt Berkowitz and Patrick Colsher), and his name appears throughout the Valtrus IPR papers responding to petitions by SAP, Samsung, FedEx/NetApp/Starbucks, Equinix, Google, and Vertiv. He was admitted to practice in 2021, so his PTAB work is recent and growing rather than a long-standing standalone practice. Education: J.D., USC Gould School of Law (2021, Southern California Law Review; IP & Technology Law Clinic); B.S., Aerospace Engineering, MIT (2017). The firm bio lists admission to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California; his E.D. Tex. appearances are on pro hac vice status, and no Texas bar admission was identified. No reliable source was found for additional bar admissions, so omissions here reflect lack of sourcing rather than absence.