Patrick M. Lafferty

I'll research Patrick M. Lafferty's professional background before drafting.

Let me verify the tracked cases and PTAB experience.

Patrick M. Lafferty — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Lafferty's practice is concentrated in electrical-engineering and software-side patent litigation. His own bios describe semiconductors, encryption and network security, distributed networks, wireless/cellular standards and standard-essential patents (SEPs), software applications, FinTech, fiber optics, artificial intelligence, and the mechanical and life-sciences arts (ANDA/aBLA). The tracked docket is consistent with that: video-streaming and live-event data architecture (SportsCastr/PANDA v. Genius Sports and v. Sportradar), vehicle telematics and computer-vision dashcams (Samsara v. Motive), and a PTAB matter where he served as backup counsel. He holds a B.S. in electrical engineering and is a registered patent attorney, so the docket skews toward software/electronics rather than pharma chemistry, notwithstanding his Sanofi Hatch-Waxman work on pen-injector mechanics.

Side preference. The tracked appearances split 3 plaintiff-side / 2 defendant-side, but with only five entries the ratio is a thin basis for a conclusion. The larger web-sourced record points to a practice weighted toward defending operating companies — Apple (against Qualcomm), Sanofi, Motive Technologies, Platform Science, OpenText/Webroot, and Uber — alongside select plaintiff-side and patent-owner representations (ROY-G-BIV against ABB/Honeywell/Siemens; SportsCastr/PANDA as patent owner and district-court plaintiff). There is no indication he is an NPE/PAE-focused plaintiffs' lawyer.

Firm context. The authoritative case list shows all five tracked appearances at King & Spalding (Washington, D.C./Austin), where he was listed as counsel/of counsel on the IP team, including ITC Section 337 work. Bloomberg Law and Cahill firm sources report that he moved to Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP as a partner in the Technology IP Litigation practice in Washington, D.C., announced June 22, 2026, joining a group that includes Chris Campbell, Britton Davis, and Alfonso Garcia Chan. Because the tracked matters predate that move, the K&S firm designation reflects his prior, not current, affiliation. No pre-King & Spalding firm history was verifiable from the sources reviewed.

Notable matters, PTAB, and credentials. Reported representative results include ROY-G-BIV's summary-judgment defeat of a standard-setting-organization IP-policy defense, and an ROY-G-BIV IPR that the firm describes as the first to uphold all challenged claims; a role in the Apple/Qualcomm SEP-FRAND disputes (including the FTC case and antitrust MDL); examination of a lead validity expert for Sanofi in the Merck insulin-glargine Hatch-Waxman litigation; and Section 337 RFID litigation for Amtech against Kapsch. In SportsCastr/PANDA's E.D. Tex. suits against Genius Sports and Sportradar, the Sportradar matter settled in 2026 (Sportradar's annual report discloses a March 2026 settlement with PANDA dismissing its claims with prejudice and €35.1 million in litigation costs), while the parallel Genius Sports IPRs reached final written decisions in March 2026 holding the challenged PANDA claims unpatentable. PTAB/IPR experience is substantial and recurring: his bios cite numerous IPRs and ex parte reexaminations, PTAB records show him as backup counsel for petitioner Advanced Semiconductor Engineering in IPR2021-00180, and the OpenText/Webroot engagement involved 40+ Patent Office proceedings. Bar/education (well sourced): J.D., George Washington University Law School (high honors, Order of the Coif); B.S. Electrical Engineering, University of Maryland–College Park (cum laude); admitted in D.C. and Virginia and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; former intern to Judge Richard Linn (Fed. Cir.).

Caveat: several representative-matter descriptions above come from firm marketing biographies and were not independently confirmed against court records; the "first IPR to uphold all challenged claims" characterization in particular is the firm's own.