John (Jay) Neukom

John (Jay) Neukom — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Practice focus and side. Neukom is a first-chair IP trial lawyer whose patent work centers on technology-sector disputes — semiconductors/DRAM, telecommunications and smartphones, network security, software, and data compression — plus substantial trade secret and Lanham Act litigation. His practice is overwhelmingly defendant-side: he regularly defends operating technology companies (Cisco, Google, Fortinet, HTC, Philips, AT&T, Kia, GAF) against patent claims, including suits brought by NPEs. That pattern matches the one tracked appearance here — Realtime Data LLC v. Reduxio Systems, Inc. et al., where he served as Skadden lead counsel for the defendant companies. Firm profiles describe him as lead counsel in more than 125 technology disputes and as having taken 21 cases to verdict or arbitration award, with successful appeals in the Federal Circuit, Ninth Circuit, and California Courts of Appeal (Davis Polk profile; Business Wire, Feb. 2, 2026).

Firm context. Neukom is currently a partner in Davis Polk & Wardwell's IP Litigation group in Northern California (Redwood City), which he joined in February 2026. His patent-litigation career prior to that ran through Debevoise & Plimpton (San Francisco, 2022–2026), Skadden (Palo Alto, 2018–2022, where he co-headed the IP litigation practice), and Quinn Emanuel (San Francisco, where he chaired the trade secrets group) (Global Legal Post, Mar. 2022; Lawdragon, Feb. 8, 2018).

Notable matters and PTAB/IPR. The most prominent tracked matter is the Realtime Data data-compression campaign: Neukom led the defense of Reduxio, Fortinet, and co-defendants through § 101 invalidity dismissals in the District of Delaware that the Federal Circuit ultimately affirmed (Realtime Data LLC v. Reduxio Systems, Inc., 831 F. App'x 492 (Fed. Cir. 2020); Realtime Data LLC v. Array Networks Inc., 21-2251 (Fed. Cir. 2023)). Other reported results include defending Fortinet against NPS patent claims (dismissal for $0), trial work for Cisco (networking), UniRAM (DRAM, $36M judgment), and HTC in the ITC smartphone wars, and the GAF/Kirsch underlayment matter where all asserted claims were invalidated at the PTAB. He does appear before the PTAB in IPR/PGR-type validity challenges — primarily on the defense side of NPE litigation — though his tracked case record is district court/Federal Circuit. He is not known for pharma or life-sciences work.

Bar / education. J.D., Stanford Law School (2004, Executive Editor, Stanford Law Review); M.A., Yale; B.A., Dartmouth; law clerk to Judge José A. Cabranes, Second Circuit (2004–05); California bar and admitted before the Federal and Ninth Circuits and U.S. Court of Federal Claims (Davis Polk bio; Lawdragon). Recognitions include Law360 "Top 40 Under 40" (2014) and Daily Journal "Top IP Lawyers" (2018–2024).