Kira Gill

I'll research this attorney's background and practice.

Let me dig into the tracked case and other matters.

Summary — Kira Gill (Baker Botts LLP)

Focus areas. Ms. Gill is a Bay Area–based IP litigator whose practice centers on patent litigation in federal district court. Baker Botts' own description of her practice identifies software, location-based tracking systems, telecommunications, medical devices, fitness technology, and advanced imaging/display technologies as her technology areas; an archived version of her firm bio also listed patent prosecution work in software, virtual/augmented reality, telecommunications, and medical devices. Her technical background is in the life sciences (B.S. in molecular biology with a chemistry minor), though the tracked and searchable matters skew toward software, networking/virtualization, and location-based gaming technology.

Side preference. The authoritative tracked list shows a single appearance, on the defendant side: AG 18, LLC v. DK Crown Holdings Inc., where she served as IPR counsel for Baker Botts. That is a very thin sample. Her firm bio states she has litigated "extensively for both plaintiffs and defendants," and web-searchable dockets show additional appearances beyond the tracked list — including a notice of appearance for Netflix in Netflix, Inc. v. Broadcom Inc. (N.D. Cal.), where Netflix was the patent plaintiff. On the available record, she is best described as a both-sides litigator rather than a dedicated NPE/PAE or defense-only practitioner, but the tracked data alone would not support that conclusion and the sample size is small.

Notable matters. In the AG 18 / DK Crown Holdings dispute (AG 18 d/b/a Arrow Gaming's gaming-patent suit against DraftKings, D.N.J., stayed pending IPRs), she was part of the Baker Botts team representing DraftKings as petitioner in the IPR campaign over AG 18's patents. The PTAB's March 2024 final written decisions found all litigation-asserted claims unpatentable, with two unasserted claims surviving (claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 9,978,205 and claim 11 of the '657 patent). DraftKings appealed as to claim 18; the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB in a nonprecedential disposition, DK Crown Holdings Inc. v. AG 18, LLC, No. 2024-2078 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2026), holding the Board did not abuse its discretion in refusing a new ground first raised in a reply footnote. Note that Ms. Gill is not listed among the counsel of record on the Federal Circuit opinion, which was argued by Eliot Williams; her documented role is at the PTAB level (she appears as counsel in the IPR papers and deposition record). She also appears on the Baker Botts team representing Netflix in N.D. Cal. patent litigation, including a matter in which a court reportedly ordered a patent holder's U.S. counsel to reimburse Netflix's legal fees following disclosure of confidential business information to a litigation funder (per IP Fray).

PTAB / IPR experience. Yes — the one tracked matter is an IPR representation, and she is identified as Baker Botts counsel in the DraftKings v. AG 18 IPR filings and deposition record. Her firm bio states her practice spans district court, appellate, and PTAB matters. The volume of her individual PTAB appearances is not large enough to characterize as a regular lead PTAB practitioner; she has been junior/backup counsel on a multi-patent IPR campaign.

Bar and education. Admitted to the State Bar of California. J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law (2022), where she was Senior Articles Editor of the Hastings Law Journal; B.S., Molecular Biology, San Jose State University (2019).

Caveat: she is a 2022 law graduate and appears to be an associate, so her published litigation record is still developing; several details above rest on the firm website, court/PTAB records, and secondary trade press rather than on any independent verification of outcomes.