Andrew J. Strabone

I'll verify this attorney's background before drafting.

Andrew J. Strabone — patent litigation snapshot

Firm and role. Strabone is a partner at Irell & Manella LLP in Los Angeles, where he has spent his career; the firm announced his election to the partnership effective January 1, 2022, and his current firm bio lists him as a member of the firm's Management Committee. No prior firm of record was located. His practice is primarily complex IP litigation with a stated emphasis on patents, plus a secondary securities/complex-business docket.

Specialty / technology focus. His docket skews toward hardware and standards-based technologies: computer memory (DRAM/NAND, server DIMM, high-bandwidth memory), 4G/LTE cellular standards and FRAND licensing, semiconductors, and enterprise software/cloud infrastructure (Kubernetes, Hadoop, Kafka functionality in the Valtrus matters). Firm bios also list telecommunications, computer hardware, computer software, and mobile remote deposit capture, and describe older non-patent defense work in securities class actions, biopharma securities, and entertainment royalty/copyright litigation.

Side preference. His tracked appearances are 2 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side, and the patent work behind them is predominantly patent-owner/plaintiff-side: Netlist (as plaintiff), Optis/PanOptis against Apple, and USAA against Wells Fargo. The single "defendant" entry, Google LLC v. Valtrus Innovations Ltd. et al. (N.D. Cal.), arises because Google filed a declaratory judgment action; Strabone's client is Valtrus/Key Patent Innovations, the patent-asserting side (Stanford's NPE database and Unified Patents both characterize Valtrus as an NPE affiliated with New PP Licensing LLC). He has also appeared for Valtrus in Valtrus v. Google and Valtrus v. Cloudflare, and for Valtrus/KPI in Starbucks Corp. v. Valtrus. In short: he is best described as a patent-owner/plaintiff-side trial lawyer with occasional defense-side engagements in other practice areas, rather than an operating-company defense specialist.

Notable cases and outcomes.

• Netlist v. Samsung (E.D. Tex., No. 2:21-cv-463): trial team member on the April 2023 jury verdict of $303.15M for Netlist, with findings of willful infringement and no invalidity. The case was on appeal (Fed. Cir. 2024-2203); the appeal was dismissed by joint stipulation in August 2026, and in August 2026 Netlist announced a global settlement and license with Samsung (roughly $200M upfront plus quarterly royalties) resolving the ITC and E.D. Tex. actions.
• Netlist v. Samsung (No. 2:22-cv-294 litigation family): part of the team that obtained a November 2024 verdict of $118M for willful infringement of three Netlist memory patents; Irell describes a 4-0 trial record for Netlist against Samsung.
• Netlist v. Micron (E.D. Tex.): the firm credits him as a core member of the team that won a $445M willful-infringement verdict in May 2024 (Judge Gilstrap).
• Optis Wireless Technology v. Apple (E.D. Tex., No. 2:19-cv-66): part of the PanOptis trial team that obtained a $300M jury award on 4G/LTE patents, framed as a FRAND royalty; he remains counsel of record in the ongoing action.
• USAA v. Wells Fargo (E.D. Tex.): jury verdicts of $200M and $102M in mobile remote deposit capture cases.

PTAB / IPR. I found no PTAB filing in which Strabone personally appears as counsel of record, so direct IPR/PGR authorship is unverified. His district court matters have nonetheless run in parallel with heavy PTAB activity—for example, the PTAB's final written decision upholding the '608 patent and the Federal Circuit's September 2026 affirmance of Board obviousness holdings against several Netlist memory patents—so his IPR exposure is best described as adjacent rather than as a personal PTAB practice.

Bar and education. Admitted in California (2014); also admitted in the Central and Northern Districts of California and the Ninth and Federal Circuits. UCLA School of Law (J.D. 2014; co-editor-in-chief, Journal of Law and Technology); UC San Diego (B.A. 2010). This is a single, uniquely identifiable attorney (California bar no. 301659); no same-name conflicts were found.