Patent litigation attorney
John Michael Guaragna
10 tracked appearances — 1 plaintiff · 9 defendant.
Specialty & background
I'll research this attorney before drafting. Let me run several searches.
Let me verify a few remaining details: prior firm history, PTAB/IPR appearances, and the Smart Mobile matter's posture.
John M. Guaragna — Patent Litigation Practice Summary
Focus areas. Guaragna is a patent and technology litigator based in DLA Piper's Austin office, where he is Texas Chair of the Intellectual Property and Technology practice. His docket skews heavily toward electronics and computer technology: wireless/telecommunications (Apple's defense in Smart Mobile Technologies v. Apple and, more recently, Headwater Research v. Apple on wireless network offloading patents), AI/accelerated computing (current defense of NVIDIA in Xockets v. NVIDIA), digital displays, server and computer hardware, networking and file-sharing software, and computer security. He also carries medical-device work (Snyders Heart Valve v. Medtronic), consumer/retail and apparel matters (Blackbird v. lululemon, Walmart, Home Depot, Nike), and a distinct patent–antitrust practice at the standard-setting intersection, including a three-month FTC antitrust trial. Firm and directory profiles credit him with handling 250–300+ patent cases in Texas district courts (W.D. Tex. and E.D. Tex.), including a large volume before Judge Albright, plus ITC Section 337 and FTC appearances (DLA Piper profile; Legal 500; Chambers USA 2026).
Side preference. Overwhelmingly defense-side. The tracked data show 0 plaintiff-side and 3 defendant-side appearances, and every representative matter in his firm bio is framed as defending an operating company — NVIDIA, BOE, Samsung, ZT, KLA-Tencor, Oracle, Medtronic, lululemon, Walmart, Microsoft. This is consistent with his 2026 Patexia Patent Litigation Intelligence Report ranking as the #1 US patent litigator for representation of defendants and #1 overall. Nothing in the public record indicates plaintiff-side or NPE/PAE assertion work.
Firm and notable results. Guaragna's patent litigation career is at DLA Piper (DLA Piper LLP (US)), where he was named co-managing partner of the Austin office in 2017 and subsequently served in that role with Nicole Brennig from 2019. No prior firm history is disclosed in the sources reviewed. Verifiable outcomes include: Xitronix v. KLA-Tencor — summary judgment for KLA on a Walker Process antitrust claim (W.D. Tex., Aug. 2016), affirmed by the Federal Circuit in 2019, with cert denied; Q Tech v. Walmart — summary judgment of §101 ineligibility on all asserted claims (W.D. Tex., on appeal); Blackbird v. lululemon — summary judgment of non-infringement in D. Del. (June 2017), affirmed on appeal, then settled; Click-to-Call v. Oracle — case stayed pending IPR, all asserted claims invalidated by the USPTO, favorable settlement in 2018; and A PTY LTD v. HomeAway — judgment on the pleadings invalidating the patent under §101. In the tracked case Smart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., he appeared for Apple at the district court level in W.D. Tex. (No. 6:21-cv-00603), filing the responsive extension and pro hac vice motions in July 2021; the case was later transferred to C.D. Cal. and stayed pending the IPRs. Note for accuracy: the related Apple IPRs and the resulting Federal Circuit appeals (Apple v. Smart Mobile, Nos. 24-1607, 25-1090, decided Aug. 27, 2026) were briefed and argued by Haynes and Boone, not by DLA Piper, so those appellate outcomes should not be attributed to Guaragna.
PTAB/IPR and credentials. His reported PTAB exposure is chiefly defensive and indirect — district court cases stayed or resolved in connection with IPR/CBM proceedings (Click-to-Call, St. Isidore, Smart Mobile) — and DLA Piper's Chambers profile notes the firm's increased PTAB emphasis; I did not find a public record of him as lead IPR/PGR petitioner counsel, so that should be treated as unconfirmed. Bar admissions: California and Texas (admitted 1998; Texas-licensed since 2004), with Federal Circuit and Fifth Circuit plus numerous California and Texas district court admissions. Education: J.D., University of San Diego (1998); B.A., Villanova University. He is ranked Band 3 for Intellectual Property – Texas in Chambers USA 2026.
Firms
Roles
- local counsel6
- lead counsel2
- Counsel1
- Partner1
Cases (10)
- Δ defendantApple Inc. v. Proxense, LLClocal counsel
- Δ defendantApple Inc. v. Proxense, LLCDLA Piper · lead counsel
- π plaintiffApple, Inc. v. Proxense, LLCDLA Piper · local counsel
- Δ defendantApple, Inc. v. Proxense, LLCDLA Piper · local counsel
- Δ defendantProxense, LLC v. Apple, Inc.DLA Piper · local counsel
- Δ defendantSmart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc.DLA Piper · Partner
- Δ defendantSmart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc.DLA Piper · local counsel
- Δ defendantSmart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc.DLA Piper · local counsel
- Δ defendantUntitled caseDLA Piper US · lead counsel
- Δ defendantUntitled caseDLA Piper · Counsel