Patent litigation attorney
Daniel C. Tucker
3 tracked appearances — 2 plaintiff · 1 defendant.
Specialty & background
Daniel C. Tucker is a partner and co-leader of Finnegan's Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy Section, specializing in patent litigation across district courts, PTAB post-grant proceedings, and Federal Circuit appeals. His practice spans a broad range of technologies, including wireless/cellular communications, semiconductor technology, consumer electronics, and internet services. Before his litigation focus, Mr. Tucker also managed an active prosecution and counseling practice, preparing patent applications in areas such as computer software, display devices, and industrial manufacturing.
While the tracked case, Google LLC v. Headwater Research LLC, lists Google as the plaintiff, Mr. Tucker's broader practice at Finnegan demonstrates a balanced approach, representing both patent owners and accused infringers. He has successfully defended large operating companies, achieving a summary judgment ruling and jury verdict of non-infringement for FedEx in a $100 million patent infringement suit and securing wins for Volkswagen, Audi, Bentley, and Lamborghini against infringement allegations at the ITC and in district court. He has also represented patent owners, such as NFC Technology, in patent enforcement actions.
Mr. Tucker possesses extensive experience in post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), having litigated dozens of Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), Covered Business Method (CBM) reviews, and Post-Grant Reviews (PGRs) for both petitioners and patent owners. He has served as primary arguing counsel in several PTAB trials and has appeared in appeals from PTAB decisions to the Federal Circuit. He notably served as backup counsel for Google LLC in an IPR proceeding against Vocalife LLC and for Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc. as a patent owner in another IPR.
Prior to his legal career, Mr. Tucker gained technical experience as an engineer with General Electric and Lockheed Martin. His educational background and specific bar admissions are not reliably sourced through publicly available professional profiles.
Firms
Roles
- Counsel2
- of counsel1
Cases (3)
- π plaintiffFederal Express Corporation v. Qualcomm IncorporatedFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner · of counsel
- π plaintiffGoogle LLC v. Headwater Research LLCFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett, & Dunner · Counsel
- Δ defendantQualcomm Incorporated v. Federal Express CorporationFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner · Counsel