John Paul Murphy

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

Good baseline. Let me dig into specific cases and his firm bio.

John Paul Murphy — Partner, Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC (Fort Worth, TX)

Focus areas. Murphy's firm bio describes a full-spectrum IP practice — patent litigation, licensing, prosecution and portfolio counseling — with an emphasis on software, telecommunications, electronics, networking, semiconductors, medical devices, financial services and mechanical arts. His public docket record is consistent with that technology spread: liquid-crystal display and panel-driver patents (Bishop Display Tech v. Innolux, TCL and BOE Technology), wireless/standards-essential-adjacent communications patents (Sol IP v. Volkswagen, asserted on ETRI-originated MIMO/Wi-Fi patents; Wireless Protocol Innovations v. TCL), and AI/computer-vision subject matter (Perceptive Automata v. Tesla, filed July 2025 in Texas). He also has a computer-science background — a B.S. in Computer Science from UT Austin and prior work as a software developer at Cisco Systems — which fits the software and networking docket.

Side preference. The six tracked appearances are all plaintiff-side, with no defendant-side appearances recorded: he is representing patent holders/asserters rather than operating companies. Several of those clients are characterized in public reporting as non-practicing entities — Stanford's NPE database classifies Bishop Display Tech as a non-practicing entity, and industry coverage describes Sol IP as a licensing/assertion vehicle. He has served in a range of roles across those matters, from lead counsel (Innolux) to counsel of record (Sol IP v. Volkswagen). Caveat: this reflects the tracked set only; his firm bio and his 2014–2019 partnership announcement describe counseling "both large and small companies," and his pre-2014 practice at two international firms likely included defense-side work not captured here.

Firm context and PTAB experience. Murphy joined Nelson Bumgardner (now Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC) in 2014 and was elevated to partner effective January 1, 2019; before that he spent more than seven years practicing IP at Baker Botts and Baker McKenzie in Dallas. The firm's 2019 announcement credits him with an "outsized role in the firm's practice in front of the PTAB" and with appellate argument at the Federal Circuit. That is borne out in the record: he appeared pro hac vice in the IPR2016-01254 through -01263 series (Focal IP/Velos Media patent-owner side, 2016–2017), in IPR2016-01522 (Google v. Fujinomaki), in IPR2019-00806, and as back-up counsel for Bishop Display Tech as patent owner in IPR2022-00501. His PTAB work skews toward defending patent owners' claims rather than filing petitions.

Education and bar. J.D., University of Pittsburgh School of Law (2006, cum laude); B.S., University of Texas at Austin (2001). Admitted in Texas (2006) and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Northern and Western Districts of Texas and the Northern District of Illinois.

Verification note: biographical details and case listings are drawn from the firm's own site, Martindale, and federal docket/PTAB filings. No verified verdicts, damages awards or settlements were located for his tracked cases; most (Bishop Display matters and Sol IP v. Volkswagen) appear to be pending. The single tracked case labeled "Untitled" could not be identified and is therefore not described.