Nandan R. Padmanabhan

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

Let me verify a few case outcomes and details.

Professional Summary — Nandan R. Padmanabhan

Practice focus. Padmanabhan is a patent and trade secret litigator at DLA Piper, based in the firm's Los Angeles office, where he is listed as a partner. His practice centers on high-stakes electronics and software disputes: wireless and standards-essential patents, semiconductors, consumer electronics, software, automotive, and media/entertainment technologies. DLA Piper's own bio notes his computer-engineering background (he led technical analysis and strategy on complex electronics and wireless matters), and the Legal 500 profile describes his work as "electronics, software and wireless patents, and software trade secrets." He appears in federal district courts, the ITC, and the Federal Circuit.

Side preference. The tracked docket is overwhelmingly defense-side: 8 defendant appearances against 2 plaintiff-side entries. The two "plaintiff" entries are Apple Inc. v. Proxense, LLC matters in which Apple is the nominal plaintiff (consistent with declaratory-judgment or PTAB-side filings against the same NPE), so the practical posture remains defense of operating companies. His client base in the tracked cases is Apple, Microsoft, Motorola Mobility, Citrix, and the streaming/tech defendants in WAG Acquisition, rather than NPEs or PAEs. In short, he is a defense-side litigator for large technology companies, not a plaintiff's-side assertion lawyer.

Firm context. All tracked appearances are under DLA Piper / DLA Piper LLP (US); no prior firm history surfaced in public sources, so the record indicates his patent litigation career has been at DLA Piper. There is no indication he has held an in-house position.

Notable matters, PTAB, and credentials. Prominent tracked matters include Proxense, LLC v. Apple Inc. (W.D. Tex., No. 6:24-cv-00143-ADA), where he is listed as lead counsel for Apple in an NPE campaign that also generated dozens of parallel IPRs; Smart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc. (transferred from W.D. Tex. to N.D. Cal.), where he appeared pro hac vice and Apple's IPR challenges produced 2026 Federal Circuit rulings—the court affirmed the Board's rejection of Apple's obviousness challenges to several claims on claim-construction grounds, while vacating and remanding findings on other claims; and WAG Acquisition, L.L.C. v. The Walt Disney Company et al., where the defendants' IPR invalidation of WAG's streaming-media patents was affirmed by the Federal Circuit in a March 9, 2026 Rule 36 judgment. He appears regularly in PTAB proceedings—USPTO filings show him on IPR powers of attorney and petitions for Motorola Mobility (IPR2021-01423) and Microsoft, among others. Bar admissions are California and Texas; he holds a J.D. from UCLA School of Law (2011) and a B.S.E. in computer engineering from the University of Michigan, summa cum laude. He was recognized in Legal 500 US (Patents: Litigation — ITC, 2022).

Caveats: the Legal 500 profile still lists him as an "Associate" (dated), while DLA Piper's current page lists him as Partner; specific trial verdicts attributed to him personally could not be independently confirmed beyond the firm's general statement that he has been part of trial teams securing favorable jury and ITC outcomes.