Kevin O'Donnell

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

Kevin O'Donnell — Henry & O'Donnell, P.C. (Alexandria, VA)

Practice focus. Public records tie O'Donnell's tracked patent work to a single technology cluster: network security and cybersecurity. All nine tracked appearances arise out of the Centripetal Networks patent campaign — the Centripetal v. Keysight Technologies and Centripetal v. Palo Alto Networks disputes in the Eastern District of Virginia and related appellate proceedings — which involve packet-filtering, threat-intelligence gateway, DNS filtering, encryption and firewall patents. There is no tracked pharma, life-sciences or mechanical work in his docket. Note that public directory profiles for him (Martindale, Super Lawyers) describe a general commercial/business litigation practice rather than a self-described patent specialty, so his patent work appears to come through local-counsel engagements rather than a marketed patent practice.

Side preference. The structured data show him 9-for-9 on the plaintiff side, and in practice that means local counsel to the patent owner, Centripetal Networks. In the Centripetal v. Keysight and Centripetal v. Palo Alto matters, Centripetal was the asserting plaintiff and O'Donnell is identified on EDVA filings as Virginia counsel for Centripetal (Va. State Bar No. 30086). One caveat on the data: two tracked entries are captioned "Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks," where Palo Alto appears as the filer/petitioner — those captions likely correspond to PTAB challenges or a mirror action rather than an assertion by his client, so I would not read the "plaintiff" label in those two entries as a representation that he has ever appeared for an operating company defendant. On the verified record, he is on the patent-owner/NPE side of the "v.," working as local counsel rather than lead trial counsel.

Firm and role. He is a member/partner at Henry & O'Donnell, P.C., a small Alexandria, Virginia firm, and the only firm in his tracked history. In eight of nine appearances he is local counsel; one is co-counsel. The jurisdictional concentration in the Eastern District of Virginia is consistent with a Virginia local-counsel practice alongside out-of-state lead firms — in the Centripetal matters, for example, lead counsel has come from Kramer Levin/Herbert Smith Freehills (and, in the earlier Centripetal v. Palo Alto Norfolk case, Kaufman & Canoles served as the Norfolk local counsel, not Henry & O'Donnell). I found no in-house role and no prior-firm history for him.

Notable matters and outcomes. Centripetal Networks v. Keysight Technologies (E.D. Va., Norfolk; No. 2:22-cv-00002) is the most direct match to his docket: he signed the complaint-related filings as counsel for plaintiff Centripetal in January 2022 and appeared again in July 2022. Centripetal v. Palo Alto Networks generated the headline result — a January 2024 jury verdict for Centripetal (reported at roughly $151.1–151.5 million) on four of thirteen asserted patents, with no willfulness finding; the court then granted Palo Alto's JMOL in part, directing judgment of non-infringement on the '437 patent and reducing the award. Press coverage attributes those results to Centripetal's trial team generally, not to O'Donnell, and I could not verify an individual speaking or examination role for him in either trial. Two tracked Federal Circuit items (including Appeal No. 2024-2373, an appeal from IPR2023-01329 and IPR2023-00445) are appellate proceedings in this campaign; because his listed role is local counsel, I would not assume he argued or briefed those appeals — published Federal Circuit opinions in the Keysight appeals list other counsel of record.

PTAB / IPR. His tracked entries include matters captioned as Palo Alto Networks v. Centripetal Networks, which is the standard PTAB caption format, and the related appeals arise from IPRs. However, I found no evidence that O'Donnell personally appears as counsel of record in IPR or PGR proceedings; the PTAB filings in this campaign that I located list other firms. Treat his IPR exposure as derivative of the district court campaign, not established independent PTAB practice. For context on how those proceedings resolved against his client: the Board invalidated numerous Centripetal patents, the Federal Circuit affirmed unpatentability of the '526 patent (IPR2022-01525) in April 2026 and issued a Rule 36 affirmance in the '607 IPR appeal in January 2026, and the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC's finding of no Section 337 violation in the Keysight-related investigation.

Bar and education. Martindale lists Kevin Martin O'Donnell as: George Mason University, B.S. 1986; George Mason University School of Law, J.D. 1989; first admitted 1989 (Virginia), with Maryland admission in 2010. The same directory entry also lists a "1989, Federal Court of Maryland" admission, which is not a recognized court name and appears to be a directory error (likely the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland); I have not independently confirmed his federal admissions. The Virginia State Bar number appearing on his EDVA filings (30086) matches this profile, so the identification is reliable.