M. Brett Johnson

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

M. Brett Johnson — Partner, Winston & Strawn (Dallas); Co-Chair, Litigation Department and Co-Managing Partner of the Dallas office.

Focus and technology areas. Johnson's practice centers on patent litigation within a broader IP and complex-commercial docket that also includes trade secret, unfair competition, trademark, and consumer class actions. His case list skews toward telecommunications and standards work — Ericsson SEP and implementation suits against Apple and Samsung, a FRAND dispute with LG over 2G/3G/4G LTE portfolios, and an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore over 2G/3G SEP licensing — alongside enterprise software and cloud computing (Valtrus Innovations v. SAP America; VMware; CenturyLink subsidiaries in Kaavo v. Tier 3), telecom signaling (Tekelec v. Performance Technologies), financial-services check processing (USAA matters), automotive (Bunker Hill Technologies v. Toyota over hybrid/electric drive-system patents), and building-materials cases (Kingspan/Centria; recent Cambria quartz-surface suits). Firm and directory profiles describe industry coverage spanning high-tech, communications, automotive, banking, private equity, and pharmaceutical. Venue experience is concentrated in the Eastern and Northern Districts of Texas, with Delaware district court work as well.

Side preference. The tracked data show a predominantly defense-side practice: four of five appearances are for defendants, with one plaintiff-side matter. That tracks his portfolio, which is largely defense of operating companies against NPE/PAE and competitor assertions (SAP, Toyota, Ericsson, VMware, CenturyLink, National CineMedia), though he has also represented plaintiffs, including inventors in Hardin v. LG and Hardin v. Samsung (geofencing) and Captivate LLC in an infringement suit. The five-case sample is small relative to his overall docket — Law360's firm page lists 50-plus appearances — so the ratio should be read as directional rather than exhaustive.

Firm context. Every tracked appearance is at Winston & Strawn; no prior firms were identified in searching. Within the firm he has served as Dallas litigation office head and now sits on the Executive Committee, and he was named Co-Chair of the Litigation Department in February 2026 alongside Linda Coberly. Firm-published content is now distributed under the "Winston Taylor" name following a combination effective June 1, 2026.

Notable matters, PTAB, and background. Highlights include a defense verdict in Tech Pharmacy Services v. AlixaRx (E.D. Tex.), where a jury returned against the plaintiff in under a day on trade secret, fraud, and four-patent infringement claims after a month-long trial, and summary judgment of invalidity for Dresser in Touchcom v. Dresser against alleged damages exceeding $30 million. In Valtrus Innovations v. SAP America, he was part of the Winston team that defeated SAP's Federal Circuit mandamus petition seeking intra-district transfer (Fed. Cir. No. 2025-118, Apr. 10, 2025); the case later settled and was dismissed with prejudice. He is listed as counsel on SAP's IPR petitions challenging Valtrus patents (e.g., IPR2025-00416, IPR2025-00419), and Toyota, his client in Bunker Hill, has filed parallel IPRs against the asserted drive-system patents. He has been quoted in Law360 on the Federal Circuit's refusal to review USPTO discretionary denials of IPR/PGR petitions, and was named among the top 250 patent litigators in Patexia's 2025 report (Chambers USA Band 6, Intellectual Property–Texas). Education: B.B.A., Baylor University; J.D., SMU Dedman School of Law, where he is an adjunct faculty member teaching pre-trial practice and advocacy. His bar admissions were not independently confirmed in the sources reviewed.