Joseph F. Jennings

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

Let me dig into the two tracked cases and his PTAB record.

Let me verify outcomes and check on the lululemon/Nike results and counsel changes.

Joseph F. Jennings — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas and firm context. Jennings is a litigation partner in the Orange County (Irvine) office of Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP, which he joined in 1991 and where he became a partner in 1996. His practice is primarily patent litigation, with related trademark, trade-secret and unfair-competition work. His firm biography describes a technology mix spanning chemicals, pharmaceuticals, semiconductor processing, optics, thin-film technology, medical devices and surgical procedures. That profile is consistent with his docket: the two tracked matters involve knit footwear/textile construction (the lululemon–Nike dispute) and a mechanical consumer product (urinal anti-splash devices in Sanastar). His broader PTAB and district court record adds medical devices and diagnostics (Masimo, Rembrandt Diagnostics, Applied Medical), chemical/feed-additive compositions, and ophthalmic optics (Luxottica). He has not been an in-house attorney; his career at least as far back as the tracked matters is entirely at Knobbe Martens.

Side preference. The tracked counts are evenly split (1 plaintiff, 1 defendant), and that balance holds in his wider record. He has represented plaintiffs/patent owners in several of his most significant wins (Applied Medical, KFx Medical, Alltech) and has defended operating companies in others (lululemon, Fresh Products, Applied Medical in the 2011 East Texas trocar case). He is not an NPE/PAE-focused filer; his clients are predominantly operating companies and established patent owners, including companies with substantial licensing functions. In PTAB proceedings he has appeared for both petitioners and patent owners.

Notable matters. Two headline results come from his firm biography: he led the trial team in KFx Medical Corp. v. Arthrex, Inc. (S.D. Cal.), obtaining a $29 million jury verdict for induced infringement that, with enhancements and interest, totaled roughly $35 million, and he argued the Federal Circuit appeal that summarily affirmed (Fed. Cir. 2015); and in Applied Medical Resources Corp. v. United States Surgical Corp. (C.D. Cal.), a jury found willful infringement and returned a $43.5 million verdict that was enhanced to a $64.5 million judgment and affirmed on appeal, 453 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2006). He was also part of the Knobbe team that won a complete defense verdict for Applied Medical in the 2011 Covidien/Tyco trocar trial in Beaumont, Texas, defeating a claimed $112 million exposure, and he remains counsel in the pending Applied Medical Resources Corp. v. Medtronic, Inc. action (C.D. Cal. No. 8:23-cv-00268), which went to trial briefing in January 2026. In the tracked lululemon matter — litigated under the caption Nike, Inc. v. lululemon usa inc., S.D.N.Y. No. 1:23-cv-00771, where Lululemon appeared as defendant and counterclaim plaintiff — a March 2025 jury found infringement of claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent 8,266,749 and awarded Nike only $355,450, rejecting the claims under the '046 patent. Jennings was listed among counsel on Lululemon's summary-judgment motion; the court subsequently granted judgment as a matter of law, held the '749 claims invalid for obviousness, and vacated the damages award, and Nike's Federal Circuit appeal (No. 2025-1709) was dismissed by stipulation in May 2026. In the tracked Sanastar matter (N.D. Ohio No. 3:25-cv-00418), Jennings is listed as lead counsel for defendant Fresh Products, which faces infringement claims on two urinal anti-splash device patents and has itself filed IPR petitions against both patents (IPR2025-01339 and IPR2025-01366, filed July 2025).

PTAB/IPR experience and credentials. Jennings appears regularly in post-grant proceedings. Public filings list him as counsel for petitioner Luxottica of America in IPR2024-01072 (E-Vision Smart Optics), for patent owner Rembrandt Diagnostics in IPR2017-01130 (Alere/InnovaCon), for patent owner Masimo Corp. in IPR2019-01583 (Perma Pure), and for Lululemon in its Nike IPR challenges (IPR2023-01460, IPR2024-00159, IPR2024-00460), from which he withdrew as backup counsel in early 2025. Knobbe Martens announced in 2018 that Patexia's IPR Intelligence Report recognized him as a top performer, including for work on behalf of patent owners. He is registered to practice before the USPTO (Reg. No. 40,664), admitted to the State Bar of California (1990) and the Federal Circuit, and admitted in all four California federal districts. He holds a B.S. in chemical engineering from Drexel University (1985) and a J.D. from Notre Dame Law School (1989), where he was on the law review; he has taught patent litigation as an adjunct professor at Chapman University Law School.