Andrew D. Burnham

Andrew D. Burnham — patent litigation practice summary

Specialty / focus areas. The tracked record is thin: a single appearance, as counsel for the defendant in Disintermediation Services, Inc. v. LiveAdmins, LLC (No. 1:22-cv-06539, N.D. Ill.). The subject matter there is software/internet-based communications — the plaintiff asserted four patents (U.S. Nos. 11,240,183; 11,336,597; 11,349,787; 11,418,446) covering web-based chat systems that use a "conversation identifier" to track communications between unauthenticated browser users and responders. The dispute centered on § 101 patent eligibility and the Alice/Bascom framework rather than on complex claim construction or technical fact issues. Beyond that single case, I found no web-verifiable practice description tying this name to a broader technology portfolio.

Side preference. The tracked counts are 0 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side. The single appearance is a defense engagement against a patent-asserting plaintiff; the plaintiff here appears to be a small entity that has asserted the same family of patents against several companies (LiveAdmins, Batia Infotech, LiveChat, MobileMonkey, and others), and Unified Patents ran a PATROLL prior-art contest on the '183 patent. On the available record, this is defense-side work for an accused operating company, not NPE-side assertion.

Firm context. The tracked entry lists Burnham as of counsel at Perkins Coie. I could not independently verify a Perkins Coie profile page or press item for him, and no other firms appear in the tracked data. Name-collision caution: public sources turn up a different, more heavily documented practice under the same name — an Andrew D. Burnham (USPTO Reg. No. 82330) now at Husch Blackwell in Chicago, with a mechanical-engineering background (Purdue), a DePaul J.D., and a patent/trademark litigation and prosecution practice. I cannot confirm whether that is the same person or a different attorney with the same name, so I am not attributing that bio, education, or bar list to the Perkins Coie of counsel without confirmation.

Notable cases / outcomes. The one confirmed matter is Disintermediation Services v. LiveAdmins. There, the defendant moved to dismiss the second amended complaint under 35 U.S.C. § 101, arguing the patents were directed to the abstract idea of organizing conversations. The court (N.D. Ill., 2024) denied dismissal, holding that under Alice step one the eligibility question could not be resolved at the pleading stage and that the plaintiff's technological-improvement arguments warranted analysis at step two — so the case proceeded. That outcome favored the plaintiff, not the tracked defendant.

PTAB / IPR. No IPR, PGR, or other PTAB appearances for this attorney were found in the sources reviewed. Flagging as unverified rather than asserting a lack of PTAB experience.

Bar / education. Not reliably sourced for the Perkins Coie of counsel; omitted. (The bar admissions and education above belong to the possibly-different Husch Blackwell attorney and should be verified before use.)