Daniel Shih

I'll research Daniel Shih's professional background before drafting.

Let me verify key case outcomes and PTAB involvement.

Daniel Shih — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Shih's patent work is concentrated in electronics, telecommunications, and computer technology: cellular/LTE and Wi-Fi standards, mobile-phone antennas, communications encoding, internet content filtering, and computer hardware/chipset patents. The tracked matter, Sol IP, LLC v. Sprint Communications Co. L.P. et al., is representative — an E.D. Tex. consolidated action involving 27 patents on cellular and Wi-Fi technology developed by a South Korean government-funded research institute (ETRI), with defendants AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon (and intervenors Ericsson and Nokia). Firm-profile listings show a similar technical center of gravity across his other patent matters. His broader commercial practice (securities, consumer, and contract litigation) sits outside patent law but informs his trial practice.

Side preference. The tracked data show one appearance, on the plaintiff side as team counsel. That single data point understates his patent practice: public firm profiles describe him representing both patent owners/monetizers and operating companies across different cases. He has acted for plaintiffs such as Fractus S.A., the California Institute of Technology, Quantum World, and BASCOM Global Internet Services, and for defendants including Zillow (against IBM) — so the record reflects both sides rather than a pure NPE or defense-only orientation. The plaintiff-side track record does include several NPE/patent-owner representations.

Firm context. He is a partner in the Seattle office of Susman Godfrey LLP, where he has practiced since 2006. Before joining the firm he clerked for Judge A. Raymond Randolph on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Notable cases and outcomes. His most prominent reported patent results: Fractus S.A. v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tex.) — a May 2011 jury verdict for Fractus of over $23 million, with findings of infringement, validity, and willfulness, later enhanced to roughly $42 million in final judgment, plus a portfolio licensing program approaching $70 million; Sol IP (E.D. Tex.) — settled confidentially shortly before trial; and Caltech v. Samsung (E.D. Tex.) — settled confidentially before trial. At the appellate level he was counsel of record for the respondent at the cert stage in the IPR-estoppel dispute arising from Ingenio, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies LP (Sup. Ct. No. 22-873, 2023), and he has argued before the Federal Circuit. He is also listed as counsel in 2025 filings for plaintiff Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC.

PTAB / IPR experience. He appears as patent-owner-side counsel in PTAB proceedings touching his district court cases — including the inter partes review petitions filed against Sol IP's patents (e.g., IPR2020-00239) and the underlying reexamination/IPR challenges to the Fractus antenna patents — and he handled the Supreme Court briefing on § 315(e)(2) IPR estoppel noted above. His PTAB footprint is real but is best characterized as case-linked rather than a standing IPR practice.

Bar / education. Admitted in Washington (2006). J.D., Stanford Law School (2006); A.M. in Economics, Stanford (1995); B.S.E. in Computer Science, Princeton (1994). This line is reliably sourced from his firm bio and Martindale/Sedona Conference profiles.

Note on sourcing: The tracked-appearance database captures only one case for him, while firm and court records show a substantially broader patent practice; the wider case list above is drawn from Susman Godfrey's own attorney profile and contemporaneous Law360/court coverage rather than from the tracked system.