Lindsay Sklar Johnson

Summary — Lindsay Sklar Johnson (Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, Atlanta)

Lindsay Sklar Johnson is an antitrust and competition litigator, not a patent litigator by practice description. A partner in BCLP's Antitrust and Competition Practice Group, she handles price-fixing, monopolization, tying, and unfair-competition cases in federal and state courts and MDLs, representing both opt-out corporate plaintiffs and defendants (per her BCLP and Chambers profiles). Her single tracked patent-related matter — SportsCastr Inc. v. Sportradar Group AG et al. (E.D. Tex., Marshall Division) — reflects that role: she appears as antitrust counsel for the defendants (Sportradar), defending newly added Sherman Act and Texas antitrust claims that SportsCastr/PANDA Interactive grafted onto its October 2023 patent-infringement suit over low-latency live sports-streaming and betting-overlay software (U.S. Patent Nos. 10,805,687; 11,039,218; 10,425,697). Her involvement is therefore on the antitrust counts in a software/streaming-technology dispute, not on the infringement or validity issues themselves; publicly available docket reports do not indicate she handles the substantive patent work in that case.

Side, firm context, and background. Her tracked appearance is entirely defendant-side (1 of 1). Firm materials describe her broader antitrust practice as working "both sides of the aisle," so there is no NPE/PAE prosecution profile. She has spent her career at Bryan Cave / BCLP (she was a Bryan Cave summer associate and joined the Atlanta office), with no in-house or prior-firm patent practice identified. She is Chambers USA–ranked for Georgia Antitrust (2020–2025) and was part of the BCLP team behind a firm-announced August 2023 Ninth Circuit appellate win; those credentials relate to antitrust, not patent law.

Notable matters, PTAB, and credentials. Her most prominent tracked matter is SportsCastr v. Sportradar, where Judge Gilstrap denied the defendants' motion to strike the antitrust allegations (June 2025) — though the parallel IPR petitions on the asserted patents (e.g., IPR2025-00266, Sportradar AG v. SportsCastr Inc.) involve the patent side, and I found no evidence she appears in IPR/PGR proceedings or otherwise has a PTAB practice. She has also appeared in major antitrust MDLs (In re Domestic Drywall Antitrust Litigation; In re Crop Inputs Antitrust Litigation, defending Nutrien). Education/bar: J.D. with honors, Emory University School of Law (2010); B.A., McGill University (2007); admitted Georgia (2010). No verified patent-infringement verdicts, Federal Circuit appeals, or settlements attributable to her could be located, and public sources do not describe a technical or patent-specialist background.