Ryan J. Marton

Specialty / focus. Ryan J. Marton is a San Francisco–based patent litigator whose practice centers on software and computer-implemented technologies: fleet-management/computer-vision systems (Motive, Samsara), enterprise software and text-processing (Zoho v. Sentius; Zoho v. Meetrix IP), 3D-capture imaging (Matterport v. Appliance Computing III), and communications/networking patents. His docket also extends to medical devices — he signed the Colibri Heart Valve complaint asserting transcatheter heart-valve (TAVR) patents against Medtronic. In the two tracked appearances, both as back-up counsel, he has handled one defendant-side matter (Unified Patents v. Motive Technologies) and one plaintiff-side matter, all at Marton Ribera Schumann & Chang.

Side preference / firm context. Marton works both sides. He regularly defends operating companies against patent-assertion entities — representing Zoho in N.D. Cal. and W.D. Tex. suits by Sentius and Bright Capture, and Motive as patent owner in PTAB proceedings — while also representing patent holders asserting claims (Colibri v. Medtronic). He is a partner at Marton Ribera Schumann & Chang LLP, a San Francisco IP boutique founded around 2016 when Marton and David Schumann left Fenwick & West to join Hector Ribera (The Recorder, Aug. 2015). At Fenwick he was part of the team that won summary judgment for Twitter in a social-messaging patent dispute (2012).

Notable cases / outcomes. Marton's most significant verified result came as plaintiff's counsel for Colibri: a jury awarded Colibri a $106.5M verdict against Medtronic over its CoreValve/Evolut TAVR products, but the Federal Circuit reversed in July 2025, holding prosecution-history estoppel barred the doctrine-of-equivalents theory and ordering judgment of non-infringement (Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve LLC, No. 2023-2153). For Zoho, he helped secure partial summary judgment of invalidity on the asserted '633 patent (written description) and the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's unpatentability ruling on the '985 patent in Zoho v. Sentius. His tracked Motive matter is a PTAB proceeding in which he appeared pro hac vice as back-up counsel for Motive (patent owner).

PTAB / IPR experience. Marton appears regularly before the PTAB, admitted pro hac vice as back-up counsel in roughly a dozen IPRs — including the Matterport v. Appliance Computing III IPRs, the multi-patent Zoho v. Meetrix IP proceedings (IPR2023-00371, 00377–00382), where he presented argument at the April 2024 oral hearing, and Samsara v. Motive (IPR2025-00574). He is not a USPTO-registered practitioner, so his PTAB work is via pro hac vice admission.

Bar / education. California State Bar (admitted 2002); J.D., UC College of the Law, San Francisco (formerly UC Hastings); admitted to the Federal Circuit, Ninth Circuit, and multiple California and Texas district courts.