Daniel (Paul) Hughes

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

Let me verify additional details on his practice, notable cases, and PTAB work.

Daniel P. Hughes — Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP (San Diego)

Focus areas. Hughes is a litigation partner whose practice centers on patent disputes, with an emphasis on software and electronics. Knobbe's own bio and San Diego Business Journal recognition describe him as representing software and electronics clients in complex IP disputes in district court and before the USPTO. His registered-patent-attorney filing history skews toward semiconductor/RF (Skyworks), cloud and e-commerce (Amazon), medical devices (Masimo, Fisher & Paykel, ICU Medical, Smith & Nephew), and graphics/communications (Magic Leap, Palantir), and he is identified as handling communications, software/security, semiconductor/optics, and design matters. He is also a member of Knobbe's antitrust practice group and has worked on antitrust litigation and regulatory presentations alongside patent cases, and he does pre-suit infringement/validity counseling and portfolio/prosecution strategy work.

Side preference. The tracked record shows a single appearance, on the plaintiff side (pro hac vice). His broader practice is not plaintiff-only: he has represented patent owners/plaintiffs (Masimo, Cercacor) and also defendants/petitioners (Amazon, Cassidian Communications). The single tracked matter — the Avidbots/Brain dispute over autonomous floor-scrubbing robot navigation and mapping patents — has a caption wrinkle worth flagging: PTAB filings list Hughes as counsel for respondent Brain Corporation (patent owner) in IPR2025-01604, and the parallel N.D. Ill. docket (Brain Corp. v. Avidbots, 1:24-cv-12569) has Brain as plaintiff with Hughes moving pro hac vice in December 2024. That is consistent with the "plaintiff side" tag, though the tracker's style ("Avidbots Corporation v. Brain Corporation") appears to follow the IPR caption in which Avidbots is petitioner. The IPRs were denied institution on discretionary grounds in March 2026.

Notable matters and outcomes. He was a member of the Knobbe trial team that won a November 2025 jury verdict for Masimo against Apple in C.D. Cal. — infringement on all asserted claims and $634,313,913 in damages (trial presentation led by other partners; Hughes is listed among team members, not as lead). He also worked on the earlier Masimo v. Philips phases (a prior-phase jury verdict exceeding $466 million; the second patent and antitrust phase resolved by a $300 million settlement). For Amazon, he handled Hammond Development International v. Amazon (W.D. Tex.), asserting eight patents plus companion IPRs, resolved by a covenant not to sue after the IPRs were substantially complete. He also appeared in Telecommunications Systems v. Cassidian (E.D. Tex.) and in ex parte/supplemental reexamination matters (including a Horiba supplemental examination). No verdicts or Federal Circuit arguments in a lead role are independently verified.

PTAB / IPR. He appears regularly in PTAB proceedings, both as petitioner's counsel (e.g., Amazon IPRs) and as patent owner's counsel (e.g., Apple v. Masimo, IPR2024-00294). He was an early PTAB LEAP practitioner, arguing Amazon's oral hearing in IPR2020-00460.

Bar / education. Admitted in California (Bar No. 299695) and registered with the USPTO (Reg. No. 76,592); B.S. Computer Engineering, University of Arizona (2011); J.D., Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (2014, cum laude). He joined Knobbe in 2014 and became a partner in 2021; no prior firm appears in the public record.