Brian E. Mack

I'll research this attorney before writing the summary.

Brian E. Mack — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Mack is a Quinn Emanuel partner in San Francisco whose patent work is concentrated in electronics and computer technology — semiconductors (fabrication, packaging, memory, microprocessor design), networking and telecommunications, wireless and standards-based technologies, video encoding, MEMS, programmable logic, and, more recently, natural-language processing and voice-assistant/AI systems. His firm bio also lists FRAND licensing, standards-setting organizations, patent exhaustion, interferences, and reexamination. He has an engineering background (M.S., Electrical Engineering, Columbia; B.A., Physics and Computer Science, Hamilton College) and worked as a satellite-network software engineer before law school, which matches the technical profile of the matters he handles. There is no meaningful pharma, life-sciences, or mechanical-patent footprint in his public record.

Side preference. He is not a single-side lawyer. The tracked list shows 7 plaintiff-side and 2 defendant-side appearances, but the split is more nuanced than the raw count: the plaintiff-side work includes representation of patent owners and assertion entities — Cloud Byte LLC in Cloud Byte LLC v. Dell Inc. (E.D. Tex., seven storage/server patents acquired from NEC via IP Wave) and, per PTAB filings, the Cloud Byte patent-owner side of the related Dell IPRs — while the defense-side work includes operating companies such as Samsung (in VB Assets, LLC v. Samsung Electronics) and Harbor Freight Tools (in Champion Power Equipment Inc. v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.). Historically his docket has been weighted toward defending large technology companies (Samsung, Google, Marvell, Motorola, Qualcomm, MediaTek, STMicroelectronics, Metaswitch), so the NPE-side work appears to be a more recent development rather than a specialty. Several tracked entries in the underlying dataset are uncaptioned, so no inference should be drawn from them.

Firm context. Entirely a Quinn Emanuel career at the partner level: he joined the firm in 2011 and remains there. Before Quinn Emanuel he was an associate at Ropes & Gray (2005–2010), following industry roles at KenCast (senior network software engineer) and General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems. He is admitted in California, New York, and Massachusetts, and is registered to practice before the USPTO (Reg. No. 57189), so he is qualified both as litigation counsel and as a patent practitioner.

Notable matters and PTAB experience. His firm bio credits him with: the Viasat v. Space Systems/Loral patent and contract case, reported as the largest jury verdict in California that year; a complete defense jury win for Marvell Semiconductor in a turbo-coding case; a preliminary injunction for WP Engine against Automattic (N.D. Cal.) in the WordPress dispute; and representation of Wisk Aero against Archer Aviation in the e-VTOL trade-secret and patent litigation, Samsung Display at the ITC, and Samsung against Apple at the ITC and in district court. He appears regularly in AIA post-grant proceedings: he was on the patent-owner team for Alacritech in the Intel IPR series (IPR2017-01391/01405/01406/01409/01410), lead counsel for petitioner Mitek Systems in an IPR (2020), and is on Quinn Emanuel's Cloud Byte patent-owner team in the Dell IPRs (IPR2025-01284 through -01288), where James M. Glass is lead PTAB counsel. In VB Assets v. Samsung, Samsung's parallel IPR petitions against the asserted VoiceBox patents were denied institution on discretionary grounds in late 2025. Two caveats: I could not locate a verified public outcome for Champion Power Equipment v. Harbor Freight Tools, and the $46.7M/$40M Delaware verdict against Amazon in the related VB Assets litigation is not attributable to Mack on the record I reviewed. He was named a Law360 Rising Star in Technology (2017) and is listed in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch (Commercial Litigation and Patent Law) and Lawdragon's IP list.