Justine Kimble

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

The searches surfaced a similar but possibly distinct name. Let me check for a separate "Justine Kimble" and any other leads.

Note on identity: No attorney named "Justine Kimble" appears in any public source connected to Bragalone Conroy. The only attorney matching this profile is Justin B. Kimble, a Dallas patent litigator who was a founding partner of Bragalone Conroy and appears as of record in Bragalone Conroy IPRs. The tracked entry is most likely a name variant; the summary below is drawn from sources on Justin B. Kimble and should be confirmed before relying on it.

Specialty / focus. Kimble's practice is patent-focused litigation and PTAB work spanning electronics and software-adjacent technologies: liquid-crystal display and light-emitting panel assemblies (Innovative Display Technologies matters), wearable biometric monitors (Valencell), solid-state drives, DRAM, CMOS and ambient-light sensors, digital printing-workflow software, robotic microsurgery systems, DNA multiplexing, and arc-fault circuit interrupters. His firm bio also lists complex commercial litigation, licensing, appellate practice, arbitration, and qui tam work. This is not a pharma or life-sciences docket; it is hardware/electronics and software patent assertion work.

Side preference. The tracked data — 1 appearance, plaintiff side, 0 defendant — is consistent with an assertion-side practice: he has principally represented patent owners and plaintiffs, including frequent NPE/PAE-type clients. Verifiable examples include complaints filed for Pardalis Technology Licensing against IBM (E.D. Tex. 2:22-cv-00452) and representation of Staton Techiya/Synergy IP against Samsung (E.D. Tex. 2:21-cv-00413) and Arlington Technologies against NVIDIA (W.D. Tex. 7:25-cv-00483). He does represent petitioners as well as patent owners in PTAB proceedings (e.g., Securus as petitioner in IPR2015-00155), so the practice is not exclusively one-directional, but the district-court posture is predominantly patent-owner/plaintiff.

Firm context and PTAB experience. He was a founding partner of Bragalone Conroy (Dallas) and previously a partner at Shore Chan Bragalone DePumpo; in March 2021 he moved with a five-partner group to Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC, where he is a shareholder. His firm bio states he has served as lead counsel for petitioners and patent owners in over 100 IPR proceedings before the PTAB, and PTAB filings confirm him as lead counsel (Reg. No. 58,591) in matters including Securus (CBM2014-00166), Innovative Display Technologies (IPR2014-01094, -01095, IPR2015-01866/01867/01868), and Valencell (IPR2017-00315 through -00321, against Apple). IPR/PGR work is thus a core part of his practice, not occasional.

Notable matters. Notable publicized items include Securus Technologies, Inc. v. Global TelLink Corp.*, 331 F. Supp. 3d 633 (N.D. Tex. 2017), in which the court granted his and Bragalone Conroy's motion to quash third-party subpoenas and depositions directed at them as prior IPR counsel (privilege/work-product and Shelton grounds) — a favorable ruling for him personally rather than a merits win for a client. His work for Valencell and Innovative Display Technologies in PTAB proceedings and related district-court campaigns (including the Delaware Display Group cases) is among the more prominent tracked activity. I found no verified jury verdict or Federal Circuit decision attributable to him in the sources reviewed.

Bar / education. Admitted Texas (2002) and to the USPTO patent bar (2006); also admitted before the Federal Circuit, PTAB, and the E.D., N.D., S.D., and W.D. of Texas. B.S. in mechanical engineering, Texas Tech University (1999); J.D., SMU Dedman School of Law (2002).