Patent litigation attorney
Kyle Gottuso
1 tracked appearance — 0 plaintiff · 1 defendant.
Specialty & background
I'll research this attorney's background before writing the summary.
Let me dig deeper into the tracked case and his PTAB/Federal Circuit work.
A few more targeted checks on his case work and current firm status.
Professional Summary — Kyle G. Gottuso
Specialty / focus. Gottuso is a St. Louis–based intellectual property litigator whose practice centers on patent disputes, with secondary depth in copyright, trademark, TTAB oppositions/cancellations, and UDRP proceedings. His substantive technology exposure, as reflected in court and PTAB dockets and his firm profile, is concentrated in financial-services and network-security technology (online banking systems, encryption, firewall/intrusion-detection and packet-filtering patents), plus electronics and components (integrated-circuit card programming machines, electric motors, electronic voting machines), medical devices, and chemical/manufacturing patents. There is no visible track record in life-sciences/pharma or in standards-essential Wi-Fi/telecom SEP litigation.
Side preference. The tracked dataset is thin — a single appearance, on the defense side — so the plaintiff/defendant split should not be read as a true practice profile. His larger docket presence shows work on both sides: he defended Commerce Bancshares and other banks against Intellectual Ventures II LLC, while also serving as back-up counsel to patent owner/NPE Masa LLC in IPR2016-00748 (Apple v. Masa) and on the related Federal Circuit appeal, and he represented Petitioner Videndum Production Solutions in IPR2023-01219. His firm biography likewise describes both asserting client patents against competitors and defending infringement claims. On balance he is closer to a defense/patent-owner-side litigator than a plaintiff's-bar NPE specialist, but he is genuinely dual-sided.
Firm context. Gottuso is a partner at Armstrong Teasdale LLP (St. Louis), which he joined as of counsel in March 2020 and where he was subsequently elevated to the profit-sharing partnership. He began his career in 2012 as an associate in Senniger Powers' IP litigation group — the firm of record in his one tracked case — and spent roughly 2018–2020 at Stinson LLP before moving to Armstrong Teasdale.
Notable cases, outcomes, and PTAB work. His most prominent matter is Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Commerce Bancshares, Inc. (W.D. Mo., No. 2:13-cv-04160), part of IV's financial-services campaign over online-banking patents (security certificate management, packet filtering, intrusion detection). Senniger Powers obtained a stay pending IPR and dismissal without prejudice, and the parallel IPR2014-00801 (with Compass Bank and First National Bank of Omaha) ended with the asserted claims held unpatentable and affirmed by the Federal Circuit in Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Commerce Bancshares, Inc., 682 F. App'x 891 (Fed. Cir. 2017); the district court later denied the defendants' fee motion and awarded only $1,804.49 in costs. He is a regular PTAB practitioner, appearing in multiple IPRs and a covered business method review (where his client won a motion to amend claims), and he has argued PTAB-side matters through to the Federal Circuit, including Masa LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 18-1160 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (Rule 36 affirmance). Outcomes claimed on his firm profile — including a multimillion-dollar electronic voting machine settlement, an early summary judgment for an electric motor manufacturer, and a seven-figure chemical-industry settlement — are firm-reported and not independently verifiable from public dockets.
Bar / education. Admitted in Missouri (2012); U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. J.D., University of Missouri School of Law (magna cum laude, 2012; Order of the Coif); B.A., University of Missouri (2009). Note that he is not a registered patent attorney before the USPTO — his PTAB appearances are as back-up counsel admitted pro hac vice, which is consistent with the Board's requirement that a registered practitioner serve as lead counsel in those proceedings.
Firms
Roles
- attorney of record1
Cases (1)
- Δ defendantIntellectual Ventures II LLC v. Commerce Bancshares, Inc. et al.Senniger Powers · attorney of record