Josef Byks Schenker

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

Key finding: he has moved to Gish PLLC. Let me verify the case outcomes and the Federal Circuit appeal.

Let me confirm his current firm status and a couple of remaining details.

Josef Byks Schenker (also appearing in dockets as "Josef Bryks Schenker") is a patent litigator whose practice centers on electronics, computer, and software technologies — cybersecurity and network security, telecommunications, semiconductors, consumer electronics, consumer products, image processing/optics, fintech, and medical devices. His technical background is in electrical engineering, which aligns with the hardware- and network-centric subject matter in his caseload. Web-published firm bios describe him as handling all phases of litigation: pre-suit diligence, invalidity and infringement analysis, claim construction, expert management, depositions, motions practice, and trial examination, plus patent licensing and portfolio counseling.

Side preference. His tracked appearance record is entirely defense-side: 0 plaintiff-side and 6 defendant-side appearances, all on behalf of Palo Alto Networks, Inc. in the Centripetal Networks patent campaign. His firm bios state he has litigated for both plaintiffs and defendants, and he has represented patent owners such as Egenera (against Cisco) and Rovi (against Comcast), so he is not exclusively a defense lawyer — but the verified record before this office is a defense practice.

Firm context. All six tracked appearances are attributed to Ropes & Gray, where he spent more than thirteen years in the IP litigation group as an associate and later senior attorney. He left Ropes & Gray (a May 2024 EDVA filing states he "is no longer employed by Ropes & Gray LLP") and joined Gish PLLC, an IP boutique with New York and San Francisco offices, as a Partner in January 2024. Court and PTAB filings from 2025–2026 list him at Gish handling matters such as Duesenfeld GmbH v. Ascend Elements, Inc. (D. Del.; IPR2024-00948) and Fortinet, Inc. v. Netskope, Inc. (N.D. Cal.; IPR2026-00031).

Notable matters. The dominant tracked matter is Centripetal Networks, Inc. v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00137 (E.D. Va.), a 12–13 patent network-security suit. A January 31, 2024 jury verdict found Palo Alto infringed all four asserted patents and awarded Centripetal $151.5 million; on post-trial motions the court granted JMOL of non-infringement as to the '437 patent and reduced the award to $113.6 million (Oct. 31, 2024), while upholding eligibility of the correlation patents and denying a new trial. Parallel PTAB proceedings went both ways: the Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB unpatentability findings on the '028 and '126 patents (Nos. 23-1654, 23-1655, Oct. 31, 2024) and vacated and remanded a PTAB decision on the '903 patent for inadequate motivation-to-combine analysis (Palo Alto Networks v. Centripetal, No. 23-1636, Dec. 16, 2024). The tracked "Federal Circuit Appeal No. 2024-2373" is Centripetal's appeal from PTAB decisions in IPR2023-00445/IPR2023-01329, where Palo Alto was an appellee; the court affirmed under Rule 36 on June 9, 2026. The tracked ex parte reexamination concerns Centripetal's U.S. Patent No. 10,931,797 (Control No. 90/019,561), a Palo Alto Networks-requested reexam of a patent asserted in the E.D. Va. case.

PTAB / IPR experience. Yes — he appears regularly in PTAB proceedings, both as counsel in IPRs/PGRs (including Palo Alto Networks v. Centripetal, IPR2022-00182 and PGR2021-00108) and through Federal Circuit appeals from Board decisions. His written and podcast work has focused on § 101 eligibility and on ITC/PTAB interplay.

Bar / education. J.D., NYU School of Law (2010); B.S., Electrical Engineering, Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science (2004), and B.A., Yeshiva University (2004). Admitted in New York (Bar No. 4935185) and before the Federal Circuit, S.D.N.Y., E.D. Tex., and W.D. Tex. A USPTO patent-bar registration number could not be verified from the sources reviewed.