Daniel S. Todd

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

Let me dig into his background and prior firm.

Daniel S. Todd — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Cleary Gottlieb's own biography describes Todd's practice as focused on patent and trade secret disputes, with trial-level experience across cybersecurity, semiconductors, power electronics, medical devices, and wireless communications. He is described as having a strong technical background and prior experience as a patent agent. That technology profile is consistent with the one substantive matter in the tracked record — the CrowdStrike/GoSecure dispute, which concerns endpoint-security and intrusion-detection patents (e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 9,954,872 and 9,106,697) rather than pharma or mechanical arts. The tracked sample is only two appearances, so any characterization of a broader specialty should be treated as preliminary.

Side preference. On the small tracked record he is exclusively defense-side: 0 plaintiff appearances against 2 defendant-side appearances. Both entries are defendant/patent-owner roles — GoSecure, Inc. as patent owner in the CrowdStrike IPRs, and a second Cleary matter in which he is characterized as likely local counsel for a defendant. There is no indication of NPE/PAE plaintiff-side assertion work. Given only two data points, this is a directional read, not an established pattern.

Firm context. He is at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, which he joined in 2025 from another major international law firm; the firm's public bio does not name the prior firm, and I was unable to verify his prior employer from a reliable source. USPTO practitioner data aggregated by third parties lists a Daniel S. Todd at Cleary Gottlieb's Washington, D.C. office under registration number 75,989. I could not confirm bar admissions, law school, or admission year from a primary source, so I have omitted them here rather than state them on weak footing.

Notable matters and PTAB experience. His most prominent tracked matter is CrowdStrike, Inc. v. GoSecure, Inc. (PTAB), where he appears for patent owner GoSecure in a multi-petition IPR campaign — an expert declaration in the record references four CrowdStrike IPRs against GoSecure. The most verifiable outcome is procedural and patent-owner-favorable: on June 25, 2025, Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart granted Director Review in IPR2025-00068 and IPR2025-00070, vacated the Board's decisions instituting two petitions that challenged the same claims of the '872 patent under competing constructions of "association," and remanded for claim-construction briefing — a decision the USPTO later designated informative and which has been widely covered (IPWatchdog, National Law Review). Docket activity shows the patent owner filing a response in December 2025 and requesting oral argument in April 2026, so at least one proceeding remained pending at the time of this review; I found no final written decision or Federal Circuit appeal to report. The second tracked matter is unidentified in the source data, and I found no verdicts, settlements, or appellate results attributable to him. Bottom line: this is a patent-owner-side PTAB practice defending validity, in addition to district court defense work, but the public record on him is thin and several standard profile details could not be independently verified.