Derek A. Gosma

I'll research this attorney's background and verify the case details.

Let me verify the Skyworks/Kangxi matters and any PTAB activity.

Let me clarify the Kangxi v. Skyworks matter and Gosma's PTAB appearances.

Derek A. Gosma — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus. Gosma is a partner in WilmerHale's Los Angeles office whose practice centers on high-stakes intellectual property litigation, with a particular emphasis on Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission. WilmerHale's own profile states that since 2010 he has handled numerous ITC investigations and related federal and state court matters, and that his cases have spanned semiconductors, mobile phones, cellular standards, video encoding, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, consumer products, and cryptocurrency. His tracked appearances sit squarely in RF/wireless technology: the Skyworks–Kangxi dispute over Wi-Fi front-end modules (Wi-Fi 6/Wi-Fi 7 RF FEMs) forming the core of his recent IP docket. He is also a member of the firm's copyright/trademark and Eastern District of Texas litigation working groups, and has advised both complainants and respondents on Section 337 strategy, including enforcement and Customs (19 C.F.R. Part 177) proceedings.

Side preference. The tracked data show two plaintiff-side and one defendant-side appearance, all involving the same Skyworks/Kangxi dispute at WilmerHale, where he served as local counsel. That is too small a sample to support a firm conclusion, and the firm bio indicates he has represented both complainants and respondents across his career—suggesting he is genuinely side-agnostic rather than a dedicated NPE/PAE prosecutor or operating-company defender. Publicly verifiable matters skew toward representing technology companies (Apple, Skyworks, mobile-handset manufacturers) in both offensive ITC actions and defensive litigation, including defending against a non-practicing entity in a semiconductor-manufacturing ITC case.

Notable matters. His most visible tracked engagement is the Skyworks v. Kangxi dispute: Skyworks filed in the C.D. Cal. in May 2024 and at the ITC in July 2024 (Inv. No. 337-TA-1413, Certain Wireless Front-End Modules), asserting five RF/wireless patents against Kangxi and downstream respondents D-Link and Ruijie; Gosma appears in the ITC complaint as counsel for the Skyworks complainants, and the parallel district court cases were stayed under 28 U.S.C. § 1659. The ALJ's initial determination (Jan. 23, 2026) went against his client, finding no infringement and no Section 337 violation by Kangxi. Other results listed on his firm bio include dismissal of an NPE-brought ITC investigation against a client-respondent (semiconductor manufacturing), a Federal Circuit reversal in an ITC investigation for a garage-door manufacturer (consistent with the Nortek/Chamberlain 337-TA-1118 matter in which he appears), a Federal Circuit affirmance/win on § 101 grounds in a consumer-payment case, and a five-patent no-infringement verdict for a mobile-phone manufacturer in the Eastern District of Texas. He also worked on the Apple side of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple (W.D. Wis.) and Apple v. Masimo (D. Del.).

PTAB / IPR experience. He does appear in AIA post-grant proceedings, though the record I found is modest rather than a dedicated PTAB practice. His own declaration in IPR2022-00076 (USAA/Petitioner v. PNC Bank) states he was counsel for Apple in Universal Secure Registry v. Apple IPRs IPR2018-00810 and IPR2019-00175, from petition through the Federal Circuit appeals (Nos. 2020-1222, -1234). The Kangxi–Skyworks IPRs (IPR2025-00372, -00373, -00912) are part of the same dispute in which he represents the Skyworks side.

Bar / education. Admitted to the California State Bar on Dec. 10, 2010 (Bar No. 274515); JD, UC Berkeley School of Law, 2010 (Supervising Editor, California Law Review); BS in Political Science, University of Tennessee, 2007, magna cum laude. He appears in PTAB matters via pro hac vice admission; I found no U.S. Patent and Trademark Office patent-agent registration number for him, so a registered patent practitioner credential should not be assumed.

Caveat: The three tracked appearances are concentrated in a single dispute, so his apparent "plaintiff-leaning" count reflects litigation posture in that one matter rather than a demonstrated pattern. Prior law-firm history beyond WilmerHale was not identified in the sources reviewed.