Benjamin Joseph Christoff

I'll research this attorney before drafting the summary.

Let me disambiguate and verify the tracked case and background.

Let me verify prior firm history and additional case involvement.

Benjamin J. Christoff — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Christoff is a trial and appellate lawyer whose practice spans a broad technology base rather than a single vertical: semiconductors and memory products, wireless and cellular communications, computer networking and databases, medical devices, digital rights management, near-field communication, and chemical/industrial processes. His technical background is in chemical engineering, and his published practice description lists work on tissue-grafting technology and biofuels as well. The one tracked matter, Nearmap US, Inc. v. EagleView Technologies, Inc., involves aerial-imagery/roof-estimation software — consistent with his portfolio of electronics, software, and imaging-adjacent technologies rather than a pharma/Hatch-Waxman focus.

Side preference. On the tracked data he appears once, on the plaintiff side (1 plaintiff, 0 defendant). That single data point understates the picture: public docket records show him acting for defendants as well, including representing American Honda in the In re NEO Wireless, LLC Patent Litigation MDL (E.D. Mich.), while also representing plaintiffs such as Nearmap and the ABC IP, LLC / Rare Breed Triggers firearms-accessory patent plaintiffs. He is best characterized as a broad-based litigator for operating companies on both offense and defense, not as a dedicated NPE/PAE-side prosecutor.

Firm context. He is a principal at Fish & Richardson P.C. in the firm's Washington, DC office (elevated to principal effective January 2025). He previously authored Patent Law in a Nutshell (3rd ed., 2018) as an attorney with The Rader Group PLLC alongside retired Federal Circuit Chief Judge Randall R. Rader. A Law360 profile also lists a "Benjamin Christoff" at Crowell & Moring in a 2019 S.D. Cal. patent case; that identity is not confirmed to be the same attorney.

Notable cases / outcomes. The tracked matter, Nearmap US, Inc. v. EagleView Technologies, Inc., is the Federal Circuit appeal (No. 24-1488) from two PTAB IPR final written decisions. The court affirmed on February 3, 2026, holding claims of EagleView's U.S. Patents Nos. 8,670,961 and 8,078,436 (aerial roof estimation) unpatentable as obvious — a win for his client Nearmap. Related Fish & Richardson IPR work includes IPR2022-01009, IPR2022-01090, and IPR2022-00734, the latter of which drew Director Review. He was also listed on a Federal Circuit appeal in the ABC IP / Rare Breed Triggers matter (No. 26-1527), resolved by Rule 36 judgment in September 2026.

PTAB / IPR experience. His firm biography states he appears before the PTAB, the ITC, district courts, and the Federal Circuit. In the tracked Nearmap matter his role was appellate counsel on an appeal of IPR decisions rather than first-chair IPR advocacy, so a claim of routine PTAB trial practice would be supported mainly by his firm bio rather than the tracked record.

Bar / education. Admitted in the District of Columbia (DC Bar No. 1025635) and registered with the USPTO (Reg. No. 70127); J.D., University of Dayton School of Law; LL.M., George Washington University Law School; B.S. in chemical engineering, University of Dayton. He served as a judicial law clerk to Judge Jimmie V. Reyna of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.