Michael Jay

I'll research this attorney's professional background and verify against the tracked case list.

Let me verify his prior firm history, other tracked cases, and PTAB/Federal Circuit work.

Let me verify the plaintiff-side case and any Federal Circuit/appellate results.

Michael Jay — Partner, DLA Piper (Los Angeles / Century City)

Focus areas. Jay's practice is intellectual property litigation with a core emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes. His firm profile and case docket reflect work across wireless/telecommunications protocols and standards, smartphones and consumer devices, integrated circuits and semiconductors, computer software and web-content rendering, Ethernet controllers, medical devices and diagnostics, biological products and pharmaceuticals. He also handles trademark, copyright, antitrust, and California UCL §17200 matters, and has litigated in district courts nationwide and at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Side preference. The tracked docket is heavily defense-side: five of six appearances are for defendants, with a single plaintiff-side entry. Substantively, he defends operating companies — principally Samsung Electronics — against NPE/patent-assertion campaigns (Maxell, SoftView, VB Assets). The lone plaintiff-side matter, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Maxell, Ltd., is consistent with Samsung's own affirmative/Petitioner posture against Maxell rather than NPE-style assertion. On the available record, he is not an NPE/PAE plaintiff's lawyer.

Firm context. He has been a partner in DLA Piper's Intellectual Property and Technology practice since January 2019, joining the Los Angeles (Century City) office. Before that he was a partner at Boies Schiller Flexner in Los Angeles/Santa Monica, where he worked on high-stakes complex litigation including trade secret matters (e.g., appearing for Uber in the 2017 Waymo v. Uber trade secret case), with pro hac vice appearances dating to the early 2010s.

Notable cases and outcomes. His most prominent tracked matter is the Maxell v. Samsung dispute in the Eastern District of Texas: after a May 2025 jury verdict awarding Maxell $112 million on three patents, the court granted Samsung's motion for judgment as a matter of law in October 2025, finding insufficient evidence of infringement on all three patents and invalidating claims in two; the court also denied Maxell's requests for enhanced damages, interest, and a permanent injunction (Law.com "Litigator of the Week" recognition followed). He also appears for Samsung in SoftView, LLC v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tex., filed Feb. 2025) and VB Assets, LLC v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tex., filed Oct. 2024, involving voice-assistant/NLU patents). In an earlier Maxell v. Apple matter (E.D. Tex.), he appeared pro hac vice for Apple, which settled in 2021. His DLA Piper bio cites a successful Federal Circuit argument overturning a claim construction and a permanent injunction obtained for a fabless semiconductor client, though no case names are given for those results.

PTAB / IPR experience. He has substantial PTAB practice. His firm bio states he represented a global smartphone manufacturer in multiple IPRs in which the Board invalidated all claims on which review was sought, and publicly filed papers list him as counsel in Samsung's Maxell-related IPRs (e.g., IPR2024-00828, IPR2024-00867) and in the VB Assets IPR filings (IPR2025-00866–00869, where the Director denied institution in September 2025 on discretionary grounds).

Bar / education. Admitted to the State Bar of California (2002); admitted in the C.D., N.D., and S.D. Cal. J.D., UC Berkeley School of Law (California Law Review, Executive Editor); B.A., UC Berkeley. Recognized in Legal 500 US (2020, patent litigation and ITC), Patexia's top-100 patent litigators, and Best Lawyers. Note: the sources for this profile are firm, Legal 500/Best Lawyers, bar, and court/PTAB filings; the Federal Circuit win and certain technology descriptions rest on DLA Piper's own bio and were not independently verified by case name.