Phillip W. Citroën

I'll research this attorney's professional background and patent litigation practice.

Phillip W. Citroën — patent litigation summary

Focus areas. Citroën is a registered patent attorney whose practice spans district court litigation, ITC Section 337 investigations, PTAB post-grant proceedings, and Federal Circuit appeals. His firm profile describes experience across computer hardware and software, semiconductor devices, network and wireless technologies, digital imaging, e-commerce and electronic payment systems, security systems, and business methods. The tracked matters fit that profile: the Carma/Uber disputes center on rideshare-matching and proxy-messaging software, and his reported representations include 3D semiconductor technology (Elm 3DS v. Samsung), memory products (Scanton v. Everspin), VoIP (Bear Creek v. Verizon), wireless technology (Realtek, ITC 337-TA-837), digital media (LG, ITC 337-TA-882), and electronic couponing (Advanced Marketing Systems v. Walgreen).

Side preference. He is a defense-side practitioner. All three tracked appearances are for defendants (0 plaintiff-side), and his verifiable client roster consists of operating companies — Uber, Google, Samsung, eBay, PayPal, Walgreen, Mitek, JSR, Everspin, and VoltServer — typically defending infringement claims and filing petitioner-side IPRs against NPE/PAE assertions. No evidence was found of plaintiff-side or patent-owner assertion work.

Firm context. Citroën is a partner in the Litigation Department of Paul Hastings LLP in Washington, D.C., where he began as an associate and has since been elevated to partner (his firm bio, IAM Patent 1000, and service e-mails in the Uber–Carma IPRs confirm the Paul Hastings affiliation). He also spent time as in-house patent counsel for a Fortune 500 information-infrastructure company. Note: the tracked docket data lists Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox for the Carma v. Uber appearance; public records and IPR filings place Citroën on the Paul Hastings team for Uber in that dispute, so the firm attribution in the underlying tracking data appears inconsistent and should be verified before relying on it.

Notable matters and PTAB experience. His most prominent tracked matter is Carma Technology Corp. v. Uber Technologies Inc. (E.D. Tex., filed Jan. 2025, five rideshare patents, trial set for late 2026), which he is litigating alongside five Uber-filed IPRs (IPR2026-00305 through -00309). Reported results include a 2024 win for JSR and Inpria in a semiconductor patent dispute and a Law360 "Legal Lion" recognition for Google IPRs in which the PTAB invalidated three BlackBerry smartphone patents. His profile states he has represented both petitioners and patent owners in over 100 post-grant proceedings (IPR, PGR, and CBM), frequently in parallel with district court or ITC litigation, and has argued before the Federal Circuit. He is also ranked in IAM Patent 1000 for D.C.

Bar / education. J.D., George Washington University Law School (2010); B.S. in Computer Science, Virginia Tech (2007, cum laude); admitted in Massachusetts (2010) and D.C. (2012) and registered to practice before the USPTO.