Michael A. Ritscher

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

The initial results are dominated by a different attorney (a Swiss IP lawyer at MLL Legal). Let me disambiguate.

Web results keep surfacing the Swiss attorney. Let me search for the tracked case and the Alston & Bird profile directly.

Professional Summary — Michael A. Ritscher

Important disambiguation note: I was unable to verify a U.S.-based patent litigator named Michael A. Ritscher at Alston & Bird through web search. Searches for the name return almost exclusively a different attorney — Michael Ritscher, a Zurich-based IP litigator and arbitrator who heads the IP group at MLL Legal and sits as an expert judge on the Zurich Commercial Court. Those results are unrelated to the tracked case below and I have excluded that individual's credentials, admissions, and education. Alston & Bird's public "Ritscher" footprint could not be confirmed. The summary that follows is grounded primarily in the authoritative case list, supplemented where noted by public docket material about the underlying litigation.

Focus areas. The single tracked appearance is Portus Singapore Pte Ltd. v. AT&T Inc., in which Ritscher is listed as lead counsel for the defendant. The Portus campaign asserts U.S. Patent Nos. 8,914,526 and 9,961,097, which claim a browser- and cloud-based system for remotely monitoring and controlling home security and automation devices over a network. The technology at issue is therefore consumer-facing smart-home / remote-monitoring software and networked device systems rather than Wi-Fi standards, pharmaceuticals, or mechanical arts. Public reporting by Unified Patents describes Portus Singapore Pte Ltd. as a non-practicing entity. No second tracked matter exists, so no broader technology pattern can be stated.

Side preference. The tracked record shows 0 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side appearance, with Ritscher acting as lead counsel for the operating company. On the available data his practice sits on the defense side, defending a large telecommunications/consumer-services company against an NPE. That conclusion rests on a single appearance and should be treated as provisional.

Firm context. Alston & Bird is the only firm associated with him in the tracked data. I could not verify any prior firm history, tenure, or current title through searchable sources; the name collision described above makes it difficult to separate his record from that of the Swiss attorney. Alston & Bird does maintain a substantial patent litigation and PTAB practice, and its attorneys have represented AT&T and other telecommunications defendants in Eastern District of Texas patent and IPR matters, but I cannot confirm Ritscher's individual involvement in those engagements.

Notable cases and outcomes. The only tracked matter is Portus Singapore Pte Ltd. v. AT&T Inc. A closely related earlier action, Portus Singapore Pte Ltd. v. AT&T Digital Life, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-44 (E.D. Tex. 2019), was resolved by a settlement agreement entered March 20, 2020, according to docket citations in subsequent Portus briefing. That same briefing shows Portus's later assertions of the same patents against other defendants drew dismissal arguments based on expiration of the patents (June 2020), the six-year damages look-back, and failure to plead compliance with the § 287(a) marking statute. I could not verify whether the tracked AT&T matter proceeded to judgment or settled, and no verdict, appeal, or reported ruling attributable to Ritscher was found.

PTAB / IPR experience. No IPR, PGR, or other PTAB filings listing this attorney as counsel were located in the available searches. Given the name collision, this should be read as "not verified" rather than an affirmative finding that he has no PTAB experience.

Bar and education. Not reliably sourced for this individual; omitted. Any biography should be verified directly with Alston & Bird or a state bar directory before publication.