Julianne Campbell

I'll research this attorney before drafting the summary.

Let me dig into the tracked case and confirm which Julianne Campbell this is.

Let me verify whether this is the same Julianne Campbell and check for a Sidley role.

Research note up front: I could not locate a publicly indexed Sidley Austin bio or Sidley-hosted page for a "Julianne Campbell." The only well-documented Julianne Campbell in patent litigation is a former Fish & Richardson (Washington, D.C.) associate who moved to Latham & Watkins (New York). The authoritative case list for this profile places her at Sidley Austin, so the two may be different attorneys, or the firm data may reflect a more recent move. The background below is flagged accordingly and should be verified in-house before use.

---

Julianne Campbell — patent litigation summary

Specialty / focus. Her tracked patent work is defense-side litigation in computer and electrical technologies. The single tracked matter, Advanced Coding Technologies LLC v. Google LLC (E.D. Tex., No. 2:24-cv-00353, filed May 10, 2024), concerns video/image coding patents (e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 9,986,303, 8,904,891, 8,904,101) — hierarchical/scalable video coding for varying network bandwidth. A same-named patent litigator's published bio describes a practice spanning telecommunications and semiconductors, standard-essential patent/FRAND disputes (5G), NFC, noise-cancellation, storage and memory technology, and ITC Section 337 investigations. That bio is not firm-verified as hers here, but it is consistent with the tracked case's technology profile.

Side preference. Exclusively defendant-side on the tracked data (0 plaintiff appearances · 1 defendant appearance), and the tracked case involves an operating company (Google) defending against an NPE/PAE assertion. She is not, on this record, a plaintiff-side or NPE prosecution lawyer.

Firm context. The tracked appearance lists Sidley Austin as counsel, with Campbell as Lead Counsel. Publicly reported career history for the same-named attorney is Fish & Richardson P.C. (Washington, D.C.) and, more recently, Latham & Watkins (New York). Prior-firm attribution beyond that is unverified.

Notable matter and PTAB. In ACT v. Google, the court granted in part Google's motion to dismiss: pre-suit indirect-infringement allegations were dismissed (ACT conceded it did not allege pre-suit knowledge), while post-suit induced and contributory infringement claims survived. The district case is reported as closed; Google filed parallel IPRs on the asserted patents (IPR2025-00999 on the '303 patent, IPR2025-01161 on the '891 patent, both filed 2025). A same-named attorney's bio lists PTAB/IPR experience, including NFC and noise-cancellation IPRs, though that attribution is not confirmed against this Sidley record.

Bar / education (unverified for this record). The same-named attorney is admitted in New York, the District of Columbia, and the USPTO, with a B.A. in Computer Science (Washington & Lee) and a J.D. (Vanderbilt). Omit or confirm before publication if the Sidley attorney is a different person.