Masood Anjom

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Good detail. Now let me verify notable case outcomes and PTAB activity.

Masood Anjom — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Anjom is a first-chair-capable IP and patent trial lawyer at the Houston boutique Alavi Anaipakos, where he is a partner. His technical background is electrical engineering (he worked in the University of Houston's nanotechnology lab), and his docket skews toward telecommunications and standards-related technologies: cellular/UMTS and voice-codec patents (EVS Codec, Saint Lawrence Communications campaigns), memory architecture (Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture), network congestion management, image sensors, and consumer media/streaming (Stingray, GoTV v. Netflix). Firm and IAM Patent 1000 profiles also describe prosecuted and litigated work in computer hardware/software and oil-and-gas technology — drilling, logging, and exploration/production — plus IP diligence and agreements. His tracked list includes a MEMS/device matter (Mems Innovations v. TDK) but no pharma or life-sciences work.

Side preference. He is predominantly a patent-holder/plaintiff-side lawyer: of 16 tracked appearances, 12 are plaintiff-side and 4 defendant-side. The plaintiff work is heavily NPE/licensing-entity representation (Parthenon, Saint Lawrence, EVS Codec, Cellular Evolution, GoTV, Network-1, VisionX). The defendant-side matters — e-Watch v. Huawei, SRI International v. Dell, Loramax and Location Services IP v. HEB, Data Carriers v. Plains — are operating-company defenses, so he has genuine two-sided experience, but the volume and emphasis run to enforcement.

Firm context and PTAB/IPR. He began his patent career at Baker Botts, then moved to the Houston trial boutique AZA (Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing), where he was promoted to partner in January 2021, before the IP group rebranded as Alavi Anaipakos. PTAB practice is a real part of his record, not incidental: he has served as lead counsel in multiple inter partes reviews for Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture (e.g., IPR2015-01501/-01502, IPR2016-00923, IPR2017-00513) and appears in post-grant proceedings such as PGR2021-00078 (G&H Diversified Manufacturing v. DynaEnergetics). USPTO Reg. No. 62,167. On the Network-1 v. Samsung campaign, Samsung's six IPRs against the asserted patents were denied institution, per Network-1's SEC disclosures.

Notable matters and outcomes. Verified high points include Saint Lawrence Communications v. Motorola Mobility, where the jury awarded more than the damages requested and found infringement willful, and a series of favorably settled patent-holder cases (EVS Codec v. ZTE, Cellular Evolution v. T-Mobile, VisionX v. Sony, Telecom Network Solutions v. AT&T). The most prominent tracked loss is GoTV Streaming, LLC v. Netflix, Inc.: a Central District of California jury found infringement of the '715 patent and awarded $2.5 million, but on February 9, 2026 the Federal Circuit reversed on § 101 and entered judgment for Netflix, holding all asserted claims ineligible under Alice. His plaintiff-side role in Wapp Tech v. Bank of America (filed while at AZA) and Network-1 Technologies v. Samsung are notable tracked engagements, though I could not independently verify outcomes for those beyond the IPR denials noted above. Some tracked entries are docketed as untitled, so the list is not fully transparent.

Bar and education. Admitted in Texas (2006) and registered to practice before the USPTO; admitted to the Federal Circuit and the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas, and the Eastern District of Michigan. J.D., summa cum laude, University of Houston Law Center (2006); B.S., summa cum laude, University of Houston. Recognized in IAM Patent 1000 (2023–present), Best Lawyers in America (2024–present), and Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators.

Caveat: details above are drawn from the firm's own bios, IAM Patent 1000, Best Lawyers, and litigation/PTAB dockets; the firm's marketing characterizations of settlements as "favorable" are not independently verifiable.