Daniel D. Smith

I'll research this attorney before drafting. Let me run several searches.

Good detail so far. Let me verify a few more items.

Professional Summary — Daniel D. ("Dan") D. Smith

Overview. Dan Smith is a Dallas-based patent attorney whose practice centers on post-grant proceedings before the PTAB, patent prosecution, and portfolio counseling. His technical focus is the computer, electrical, and mechanical arts; his firm bio cites matters involving network systems and protocols, wireless communications, semiconductor fabrication, hybrid vehicle drivetrains, heated flooring systems, and trampolines. The tracked litigation cluster is aerial-imagery/geospatial software — the Nearmap–EagleView roof-measurement disputes. He came to law practice after more than a decade as a lead software developer/architect in telecommunications (call control and billing applications), and is a named inventor on U.S. Patent 6,914,967 (quality-of-service measurement in a telecom network).

Side preference. The tracked record is evenly split — 2 plaintiff-side and 2 defendant-side appearances — and reflects the same underlying dispute from both postures: acting for Nearmap as petitioner in IPRs (docketed plaintiff-side) and as defendant in the parallel district court case (Eagle View Technologies, Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00283, D. Utah). He is not an NPE/PAE plaintiff's-side specialist; the pattern is defense-and-challenge work for operating companies, with roles ranging from back-up and additional counsel to team member rather than lead trial counsel.

Firm context. All tracked appearances are for Fish & Richardson, where he was elevated to principal in the Patent Group effective January 1, 2019 (Dallas office), and where his bio describes him as a member of the firm's post-grant group. Note a source ambiguity: a Haynes Boone attorney profile for a "Dan Smith" (Dallas; Counsel) matches his credentials exactly — SMU Dedman J.D. cum laude, UT Austin computer science degree, telecom software background, the same QoS patent, and a Managing IP "top 50 PTAB petitioner attorneys" recognition for 2020 — and states that some listed PTAB representations predate joining Haynes Boone. I could not verify a transition from Fish to Haynes Boone in a firm press release or news report, and USPTO registration data (Reg. No. 71,278) still lists Fish & Richardson; treat the current-firm question as unresolved.

PTAB / notable matters. PTAB work is the core of the practice; his Fish bio states he has represented clients in more than 60 PTAB trials on both petitioner and patent-owner sides, and Managing IP ranked him among the top 50 petitioner-side attorneys at the PTAB in 2020. Most prominent tracked matter: Nearmap US, Inc. v. Eagle View Technologies, Inc. (IPR2022-00734, among related petitions). The Board's October 2023 final written decision upheld the claims on secondary considerations; on Nearmap's request the Director vacated and remanded (Feb. 2024) for failure to resolve claim construction and to conduct a full Graham analysis, and on remand the Board found all challenged claims obvious (July 2024). The related appeal was affirmed by the Federal Circuit (Eagle View Techs., Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc., No. 24-1488, Fed. Cir. Feb. 3, 2026, nonprecedential), though the reported appellate argument was presented by another Fish attorney. He also appears as back-up counsel in unrelated IPRs, including Apple Inc. v. Ericsson (IPR2022-00736) and, briefly, Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp. (IPR2022-01465).

Bar / education. Admitted in Texas and before the USPTO, with Federal Circuit court admission; J.D. cum laude, SMU Dedman School of Law (2010); computer science degree, University of Texas at Austin (2004).

Sourcing note: firm bio, registration data, and Federal Circuit/PTAB decisions cited above. The current-firm question and the precise scope of his individual (versus team) role in the Nearmap matters are not fully resolvable from public records.