Patent litigation attorney

Frederick Mau

5 tracked appearances — 0 plaintiff · 5 defendant.

Specialty & background

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

Let me verify the tracked cases and check for PTAB/IPR activity.

Practice summary — Frederick Mau (Intellectual Property Counsel, Toyota Motor North America, Inc.)

Specialty / focus areas. All five tracked matters are patent infringement suits naming Toyota entities as defendants, and the technical mix is automotive and electronics rather than life sciences: standards-based wireless (WI-LAN Inc. et al. v. Toyota Motor Corp. — WI-LAN/Quarterhill is a long-standing Wi‑Fi and telecommunications licensing entity), connected-vehicle, telematics and EV-charging subject matter (Emerging Automotive LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp. / Toyota Motor North America; AutoConnect Holdings LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp.), and power-management/electronics art (Chemtron Research LLC v. Toyota Motor North America — Chemtron's asserted portfolio indexes primarily to electrical machinery, computer technology and power-conversion/battery-charger technology). That profile matches his stated in-house remit for Toyota's Advanced Research, Vehicle Engineering and Manufacturing business units in North America.

Side preference. He is exclusively a defendant-side, in-house practitioner in the tracked data: five appearances for Toyota, zero plaintiff-side appearances. His broader role does include offensive monetization — he is Director of Patent Licensing for Toyota IP Solutions, which launched in December 2019 and by 2021 offered roughly 28 licensing portfolios — but that is outbound licensing, not patent-assertion litigation against accused infringers.

Firm context. He practices in-house at Toyota Motor North America, Inc., where (per his Center for Automotive Research bio and Toyota press statements) he handles domestic and foreign patent filing, prosecution and portfolio management for North American research, engineering and manufacturing units, and advises on patent disputes, clearance/FTO studies, open-source issues, IP terms in contracts, and IP policy support. He is also identified as IP counsel for Toyota Connected and as a Toyota IP Solutions spokesperson on the company's annual IPO patent rankings. Earlier records — including USPTO Appeal 2020‑000535, Ex parte Dayal and Mau II, listing Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America as real party in interest — place him with the Toyota engineering/manufacturing legal organization as well. No law firm affiliation or prior firm history was identified in the sources reviewed.

Notable cases and outcomes. The most prominent tracked matter is the Emerging Automotive campaign. In the 2023 consolidated E.D. Tex. cases (Nos. 2:23‑cv‑00434 and 2:23‑cv‑00437, Judge Gilstrap), the court granted Toyota's and Kia's motions for summary judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent 10,407,026 in June 2025, with parallel IPRs and an ex parte reexamination of the remaining patents; in IPR2024‑01167 the Board's final written decision of January 26, 2026 held claims 1–5 and 7–21 of U.S. Patent 11,738,659 unpatentable. Emerging Automotive then filed a successor E.D. Tex. action in August 2025 (No. 2:25‑cv‑00782), where Toyota's motion to stay pending the PTAB proceedings was denied in July 2026. Outcomes in the WI-LAN, AutoConnect Holdings and Chemtron matters were not verifiable in the sources reviewed. Separately, public patent records list him as a named inventor on several Toyota filings.

PTAB / IPR experience. Toyota is a frequent petitioner in the IPR/PGR proceedings arising from these campaigns, but his name does not appear on the PTAB papers located in this review, so regular personal IPR/PGR appearance cannot be confirmed from public filings.

Bar / education. Not reliably sourced; the directory listings located provide no bar admission or education information. (Disambiguation note: records under "Frederick W. Mau II" — including the named-inventor listings and the 2020 USPTO appeal — appear to relate to the same individual; no other attorney of this name with a patent litigation practice was identified, but this was not independently confirmed.)

Firms

Roles

  • in-house3
  • In-house Counsel1
  • Intellectual Property Counsel1

Cases (5)