Daniel J. Schwartz

I'll research this attorney's background and practice.

Let me dig into his prior firm history, notable outcomes, and PTAB work.

Let me verify his prior firm and notable outcomes.

Professional Summary — Daniel J. Schwartz (Nixon Peabody LLP)

Specialty / technology focus. Schwartz is an IP trial lawyer whose practice centers on patent litigation, with additional work in trade secrets, trademark, copyright, and licensing disputes; his firm bio states he appears in federal court and before the USPTO. The technologies he has litigated span chemistry and chemical engineering, complex polymer chemistry, arterial stents, 3-D vision, wireless communications protocols, telecommunications networking architecture, GIS/geolocation and database management, QR-code and internet-related technologies. His tracked docket is concentrated in data-center cooling/thermal-management hardware (the Valtrus/Key Patent Innovations campaign against Vertiv and its customers), and he also advises on AI-related IP issues. Firm-practice rankings note electronics, semiconductor, and software patent disputes more broadly.

Side preference. He works predominantly on the defense side. Of the five tracked appearances, four are as defendant-side counsel and one as plaintiff-side counsel — and that single plaintiff role (Vertiv Corp. v. Valtrus Innovations, as trial counsel) is a declaratory-judgment action brought by an operating company, Vertiv, against an NPE. In the related Valtrus matters he has served as lead counsel (Valtrus v. TierPoint), as "Vertiv counsel" (Valtrus v. NTT Data Services), as coordinated defense counsel (Valtrus v. Lumen), and as backup/co-lead in an additional defendant-side case. The pattern is defense of operating companies and their customers rather than prosecution for patent owners/PAEs.

Firm context. Schwartz is a partner in Nixon Peabody's Chicago office and was named Deputy Leader of the firm's Intellectual Property practice in September 2024; he previously led the firm's IP Litigation team. He joined Nixon Peabody in early 2020 (firm announcements in February–March 2020). The sources reviewed do not identify the firm he came from prior to Nixon Peabody, so that prior history is not confirmed here.

Notable matters. His most prominent tracked work is the consolidated Eastern District of Texas litigation over Valtrus Innovations' data-center cooling patents (U.S. Patents including the '277, '287, '179, '870, and '682 patents), captioned at Valtrus Innovations Ltd. v. NTT Data Services, LLC (lead case) and Vertiv Corp. v. Valtrus Innovations Ltd. (member case before Judge Gilstrap), where Vertiv intervened and later counterclaimed against Valtrus; claim construction, dispositive motions, and an April 2026 jury setting are reflected on the docket, with related MDL No. 3190 proceedings. He is also counsel in Valtrus v. TierPoint, Valtrus v. Lumen, and Vertiv-related actions against other data-center customers. Nixon Peabody practice materials additionally cite work for Scientific Applications & Research Associates v. Zipline (N.D. Cal.) (validity challenges overcome), a rare preliminary injunction for Performance Solutions (S.D.N.Y.), and Network System Technologies litigation against Samsung, Lenovo, and Qualcomm; those descriptions are stated at the firm level and I could not confirm Schwartz's individual role in each from the sources reviewed.

PTAB / IPR experience. He has appeared in AIA post-grant practice, though not as a high-volume petitioner's counsel. He is counsel of record for Vertiv in IPR2025-00667 and IPR2025-00668 against Valtrus patents (filed 2025), including briefing on discretionary denial under the Director's interim Fintiv procedure, and he has been counsel for patent owner MemoryWeb in Samsung Electronics v. MemoryWeb, IPR2022-00221. His firm bio notes experience "advising on inter partes reviews and other proceedings before the USPTO," and he has co-authored commentary on PTAB claim-construction standards.

Bar / education. Admitted in Illinois in 1995; J.D., Northwestern University School of Law, 1995 (per Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers listings). Recognized in Best Lawyers (Litigation–Patent, since 2025) and Super Lawyers (2026).

Note on name disambiguation: this profile refers to Daniel J. Schwartz of Nixon Peabody (Chicago). It is not Daniel R. Schwartz, a Chicago plaintiff-side class-action/commercial litigator at DiCello Levitt, nor the technical expert witness "Daniel Schwartz, Ph.D." who appears in unrelated IPR records. Some facts above (prior firm, individual roles in certain firm-level matters) could not be independently verified and are flagged accordingly.