Carey Matthew Rozier

I'll research this attorney's background and verify the case details before drafting.

Let me dig into specific cases and his professional credentials.

Specialty / focus areas. Rozier's tracked docket is concentrated in wireless communications and networking: Wi-Fi/WLAN standards (802.11, Wi-Fi Multimedia/WMM, WPS), MIMO and beamforming, Bluetooth, 5G/telematics, and IoT/smart-home platforms. The CommWorks Solutions matters assert a Wi-Fi portfolio (e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,027,465, RE44,904, 7,891,807) against chipmakers and equipment vendors; Integral Wireless Technologies asserts 802.11n/ac, MIMO, Bluetooth wake-up and 5G patents against device makers; IoT Innovations targets smart-home and home-security systems; Fleet Connect Solutions concerns telematics. Outside wireless, his tracked cases include augmented-reality/virtual try-on software (Zugara v. Jand, Inc.) and mechanical/consumer products (Ministrap strap patents; P&F Brother Industrial v. Home Depot over power-tool patents). His firm bio describes a broader practice spanning computer hardware/software, telecommunications, medical devices, multimedia, user interfaces, and consumer products, plus trade secret and trademark litigation — but there is no pharma/life-sciences or Hatch-Waxman work in the tracked record. (Sources: firm bio at rhmtrial.com; court complaints via CourtListener/PACER monitors.)

Side preference. Overwhelmingly plaintiff-side: 14 of 16 tracked appearances are on the plaintiff side versus 2 on the defense side. The plaintiffs are monetization/licensing vehicles — CommWorks Solutions, IoT Innovations, Integral Wireless Technologies, Fleet Connect Solutions, Zugara, Better Browsing, Ministrap, Alto Dynamics, Liberty Access Technologies Licensing — the sort of NPE/PAE-side prosecution of patent cases typical of a plaintiff-side patent boutique. His two defense-side tracked matters (one as local counsel, one as lead counsel) are listed as untitled in the authoritative data and cannot be characterized further. Notably, the firm's own practice description emphasizes defense work as well — representing Fortune 100 operating companies and Section 337 ITC respondents — so the docket skew toward plaintiffs likely reflects this particular data set rather than the full scope of his practice.

Firm context and credentials. He practices at Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC, an Atlanta-founded patent litigation boutique with additional offices in Denver, Washington, D.C., and Austin; his filings list a Denver address and an IPR filing lists him as counsel for the patent owner alongside firm colleagues Kristin Whidby and Jonathan Hardt. I found no verifiable prior-firm history, so I can't state one. He is a registered patent attorney (USPTO Reg. No. 63,429) and, per the firm bio, holds a J.D. from George Washington University Law School (2006) and a B.S. in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Georgia Tech (2003).

Notable cases, outcomes, and PTAB work. The most prominent tracked matters are the CommWorks Solutions v. Qualcomm cases — a February 2025 E.D. Tex. suit that CommWorks voluntarily dismissed in March 2025 after Qualcomm moved to dismiss for improper venue, and a parallel W.D. Tex. action against Qualcomm affiliates — along with IoT Innovations v. Savant Systems and related ADT/Savant suits in D. Mass., where pending motions to dismiss were denied as moot after the court consolidated the related actions. Fleet Connect Solutions v. Tesla is also tracked. I could not verify any verdict, judgment, or Federal Circuit appeal in these cases; several (e.g., Better Browsing v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise, July 2023) ended in voluntary dismissal. Rozier has substantial post-grant experience: his bio states he has represented both petitioners and patent owners in dozens of IPRs and ex parte reexaminations, and a 2025 PTAB filing confirms him as lead counsel for a patent owner.