Daniel L. Reisner

I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting.

Let me verify the two tracked cases and educational background.

Daniel L. Reisner — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Reisner's practice spans both technology and life sciences. His firm profile describes emphasis on telecommunications and networking, analog/digital and image processing, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and medical devices. The two tracked matters fit the technology side squarely: NovaCloud Licensing LLC v. Charter Communications, Inc. (E.D. Tex., filed Dec. 31, 2025), a streaming-media suit over adaptive bitrate streaming, manifest manipulation, and dynamic ad insertion patents; and Headwater Research LLC v. Charter Communications, Inc. (E.D. Tex., filed Aug. 27, 2025), one of a 15-case campaign asserting a large portfolio of device traffic-control and differential policy patents against cable and wireless operators. His firm-published matter list also includes cellular/LTE (TC Technologies), VoIP (Sprint v. Charter), DOCSIS/cable modem technology (Entropic v. Charter), bar-code recognition (Hand Held Products v. Amazon), and video technologies.

Side preference. Both tracked appearances place him as lead counsel on the defendant side (0 plaintiff / 2 defendant). That is consistent with his broader publicly listed docket, which is overwhelmingly defense of operating companies against NPE/PAE and competitor suits — Charter, Amazon, Time Warner Cable, Sanofi, Regeneron, and Pfizer. He is not exclusively a defense lawyer, however: his firm bio notes representative plaintiff-side and licensing work, including asserting an LTE patent for TC Technologies against Sprint and a plaintiff's verdict in a Delaware Chancery licensing dispute for Medicalgorithmics. The practical tilt is defense of large technology and life sciences companies, with selective plaintiff-side engagement and IP due diligence/transactional work.

Firm context. He is a partner at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP in New York. Per his own PTAB declarations, he joined Kaye Scholer LLP in September 1994 and moved to the combined firm upon the Kaye Scholer–Arnold & Porter merger in 2017; his tracked matters reflect both firm names. He has spent his entire patent litigation career at that firm lineage — no in-house role. He is repeatedly ranked in IAM Patent 1000 (Silver – Litigation, New York) and Managing IP IP Stars as a Patent Star.

Notable results and PTAB experience. Verified outcomes from firm and court sources include: Touchstream Technologies v. Charter (E.D. Tex. 2025), where Reisner and David Benyacar led the trial team to a jury verdict of non-infringement on three content-casting patents after the plaintiff sought over $1 billion; Amgen v. Sanofi/Regeneron (D. Del.; Fed. Cir. 2021; Supreme Court 2023), in which he was part of the team that invalidated anti-PCSK9 antibody patents asserted against Praluent® — a case later taken up by the Supreme Court on enablement; Pfizer v. Teva (D.N.J.; Fed. Cir.), upholding validity of Celebrex® patents after a bench trial; Univ. of Rochester v. G.D. Searle (Fed. Cir.), summary judgment of invalidity for lack of written description affirmed; Hand Held Products v. Amazon (Fed. Cir. 2016), non-infringement affirmed; Broadband iTV v. Time Warner Cable, § 101 invalidity affirmed; and Quantum Stream v. Charter (S.D.N.Y. 2018), § 101 dismissal that was not appealed. He does appear regularly in PTAB proceedings, both as counsel and via declarations: he sought pro hac vice admission in numerous IPRs (including IPR2017-02105/02106, granted), filed a declaration in IPR2021-00880 defending Regeneron's Eylea® patent, and represented TC Technologies in a successful reexamination (90/014,708). Both tracked Charter matters remain pending, so no outcomes are attributable to them.

Bar/education. New York bar, admitted 1995 (NY Bar No. 2685543); also admitted in the S.D.N.Y., E.D.N.Y., and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Wesleyan University, B.A. 1991; New York University School of Law, J.D. 1994 (per Martindale-Hubbell).

Note on sourcing: details of his broader docket above come from his Arnold & Porter bio and PTAB filings rather than an independent case-tracking service, and no docket-level verification was performed on each listed matter. The tracked-appearance dataset underlying this profile reflects only two Charter cases, which understates the scope of his practice.