Reuben Chen

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Reuben H. Chen — Cooley LLP (Palo Alto), IP Litigation partner

Specialty / focus. Chen's practice is concentrated in patent and trade secret litigation across computing, web, mobile and communications technologies, plus medical devices, life sciences and optics — a range reflected in matters involving flow cytometry (Beckman Coulter/Cytek), spinal implants (RSB Spine), thermal/electronics cooling (Asetek v. CoolIT/Corsair), and consumer electronics, networking and software (Snap, Meta/Facebook, Google, Uber, Wyze, Netgear, 3M, Varian, HTC, BitTorrent, Box, Tencent). Cooley's own bio and Legal 500/World IP Review coverage describe him as a lead trial lawyer in high-stakes competitor-on-competitor disputes as well as NPE suits. He has not built a niche in standards-essential wireless licensing or ANDA/Hatch-Waxman work on the public record reviewed.

Side preference. Overwhelmingly a defense-side lawyer for operating companies. The tracked list shows 2 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side appearance — both plaintiff entries are the Cytek Biosciences matter (where Cytek appears as the counterclaiming/asserting party against Beckman Coulter) and the defendant entry is Google in Brodti Inc. v. Google LLC, where Chen is listed as lead counsel. Set against that, his publicly reported docket is dominated by defense of technology and life-sciences companies against PAEs and competitors, with occasional plaintiff-side enforcement work for clients such as Zenith Electronics and RSB Spine.

Notable matters and outcomes. Reported results include Sensormatic Electronics v. Wyze Labs (§ 101 win invalidating all five asserted patents, affirmed on appeal, with Chen arguing at the Federal Circuit); SRK Technology v. Snap (all challenged claims invalidated at the PTAB and affirmed); Evolutionary Intelligence v. Facebook (§ 101 win plus Federal Circuit affirmance); Asetek Danmark v. CoolIT Systems/Corsair (summary judgment of noninfringement, with Chen arguing the Federal Circuit appeal); Advanced Video Technologies v. HTC (dismissal for lack of standing plus a fee award); and RSB Spine v. DePuy Synthes, where Cooley won a jury verdict for RSB Spine (reported as a $12 million verdict) and later defeated DePuy's priority challenge in a 2025 patent interference bench trial. In the tracked matters: Brodti v. Google — the Delaware infringement case against Google AdSense/Google Ads was stayed in August 2025 pending Google's instituted IPR of U.S. 11,416,898, and the parallel W.D. Tex. case was voluntarily dismissed by Brodti; and Beckman Coulter v. Cytek Biosciences, where an August 2026 Delaware jury found for Cytek on noninfringement/invalidity as to three of four asserted claims but found infringement of one claim under the doctrine of equivalents, awarding roughly $56 million (reported as $20 million lost profits plus $36 million royalties), a result Cytek stated it would challenge post-trial and potentially on appeal.

PTAB / IPR experience. Yes — he appears regularly in post-grant proceedings, both as petitioner's and patent owner's counsel. Reported examples include the Varian v. Best Medical IPRs (IPR2020-00071/-72/-76), Snap and WhatsApp IPRs (including IPR2015-00740, which ended in a final written decision invalidating all challenged claims), 3M IPRs in Bay Materials, Google's IPR2025-00472 against BrodTi, and Cytek's IPR2025-01319 against a Beckman Coulter flow-cytometer patent.

Bar / education. J.D., Stanford Law School, 2003; licensed in California since 2003 (per Super Lawyers). Cooley's materials state he joined the firm in 2003 and is a Palo Alto–based partner; no prior law-firm history is identified in the sources reviewed, so any earlier firm affiliation is unverified.