Corey T. Leggett

I'll research this attorney's background before drafting the summary.

Let me verify the firm timeline and the tracked case.

Let me pin down the firm timeline and his role in the tracked case.

Corey T. Leggett — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Leggett is a San Francisco–based IP and technology litigator with a patent-heavy docket and a chemical-engineering technical background, whose practice spans health/fitness-monitoring wearables, chipset and memory-controller hardware, software, WiFi/mesh networking and other wireless (including standard-essential patent) matters, industrial chemicals and coatings, antibody therapeutics/biopharma, autonomous-driving systems, LED lighting, and noise-cancellation audio. His published profile describes work in district courts nationwide, the ITC, the PTAB, and in arbitration, covering the full arc from pre-suit strategy through jury trial, post-trial, and appeals (Greenberg Traurig profile; Best Lawyers "Ones to Watch," Litigation–Patent and Patent Law).

Side preference. The tracked data is thin — a single appearance, coded to the defendant side — so any side-preference conclusion is provisional. His firm-reported matter list skews clearly defense-side: he has defended a major coatings manufacturer, an automotive OEM, a mobile-device maker in SEP suits, an aviation-software company, an EDA company, and a biopharmaceutical company (in a $500M+ arbitration). Notably, in the one tracked matter he appears on behalf of the patent owner, Omni MedSci, in PTAB proceedings captioned WHOOP, Inc. v. Omni MedSci, Inc. — i.e., he has worked both sides, but there is no evidence he is a regular plaintiff-side prosecutor for NPEs/PAEs.

Firm context. Public profiles as of 2026 list him as a shareholder at Greenberg Traurig in San Francisco (also reflected in the State Bar of California record). Before that he was counsel at Nixon Peabody, which he joined in its San Francisco office in August 2024 from Hogan Lovells (Managing IP; Nixon Peabody/GT profiles) — Nixon Peabody is the affiliation reflected on the tracked docket, and case correspondence as late as late 2025 shows the Nixon Peabody email address. Firm databases for lateral moves lag, so the current-firm listing should be treated as accurate to the most recent firm-site and bar-record sources.

Notable matters and PTAB work. The most prominent items: (1) WHOOP, Inc. v. Omni MedSci, Inc. — the parallel D. Del. litigation (Omni MedSci, Inc. v. WHOOP, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-00140, before Judge Bryson) over wearable optical physiological-monitoring patents, which has been stayed pending IPR/PGR review of all asserted claims, plus the related PTAB proceedings (including IPR2025-01583/-01584 and PGR2026-00003, which was instituted and drew a sua sponte Director Review on IPR eligibility in 2026); (2) a multi-week, multi-patent coatings jury trial in which his team won an across-the-board invalidity verdict that the Federal Circuit affirmed (client not named in the firm's description); (3) ITC investigations involving WiFi routers/mesh networking and noise-cancellation headphones; and (4) one of the earliest PTAB post-grant reviews (PGRs). He appears regularly in PTAB proceedings — he is a registered practitioner (Reg. No. 70,017) and was among counsel of record for Omni MedSci in the Samsung-filed IPR/PGR challenges to the same patent family — and his prior Hogan Lovells PTAB work includes Halliburton Energy Services v. U.S. Well Services (IPR2021-01032).

Bar/education. B.S., Chemical Engineering, cum laude, Virginia Tech; J.D., magna cum laude, Capital University Law School (Managing Editor, Capital University Law Review); admitted in Ohio (2014), D.C. (2015), Colorado (2017), and California (2022); admitted before the Federal Circuit, N.D. Cal., E.D. Tex., and the USPTO.