Patent litigation attorney
Samuel Franklin Baxter
10 tracked appearances — 6 plaintiff · 4 defendant.
Specialty & background
I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting.
Let me verify the specific tracked cases and PTAB experience.
Let me verify Baxter's role in the specific tracked cases and confirm the retirement and notable outcomes.
Samuel F. "Sam" Baxter — patent litigation summary
Focus areas. Baxter's tracked docket and his firm bio point to a broad, technology-agnostic patent trial practice centered on the Eastern District of Texas: wireless/telecom and cellular standards (Optis/PanOptis v. Apple on 4G LTE; Ericsson v. Qualcomm), consumer electronics and software platforms (Vocalife v. Amazon; Seven Networks v. Apple; TiVo v. EchoStar on DVR; Visto v. Seven on mobile email sync), semiconductors (Greenthread), automotive (Paice v. Toyota, hybrid drivetrains), medical devices and life sciences (Medtronic v. Cordis stents; Chiron/The Rockefeller University v. Centocor, TNF antibody technology), and mechanical/banking equipment (Cummins-Allison v. Glory). The Greenthread and Vocalife matters are standard-essential/complex-software-flavored; he also handled ride-sharing/mobility patents in the Carma v. Uber dispute. Weighted toward electrical engineering, software, and consumer-tech subject matter, with occasional life-sciences work.
Side preference. Predominantly plaintiff-side / patent-owner representation. Of the 10 tracked appearances, 6 are plaintiff-side, and the plaintiff matters are patent-holder assertions (Vocalife, Carma Technology, Greenthread as plaintiff). Several of the four "defendant"-labeled entries appear to place him on the patent-owner rather than accused-infringer side of the posture — e.g., Greenthread (the patent owner) in Texas Instruments v. Greenthread, Secure Communication Technologies in Google v. Secure Communication Technologies, and Carma in Unified Patents v. Carma (an IPR challenge). Advanced Coding Technologies LLC v. Undisclosed is a defense-side lead-counsel entry. On balance this is an NPE/patent-owner-leaning practice rather than a defense-of-operating-companies practice, though he has represented both sides. McKool Smith's firm-level Patexia rankings place him among the top-20 most active patent plaintiff attorneys (2025 report) and top-20 overall active patent attorneys representing both plaintiffs and defendants (2026 report).
Firm context and notable outcomes. He was a principal in McKool Smith's Marshall and Dallas offices from 1995 until his reported retirement in 2026, following 56 years of practice; before McKool Smith he served as a Texas state district judge and as district attorney for Harrison County, Texas. Notable reported results include the PanOptis/Optis v. Apple 4G LTE litigation (verdicts of $506M and $300M, followed by a 2026 retrial clearing Apple), a patent verdict for Vocalife against Amazon, a favorable outcome for Paice against Toyota, and the 2024 $1.4B settlement for the State of Texas against Meta. His best-known non-patent win is the 2014 False Claims Act jury verdict on behalf of relator Joshua Harman against Trinity Industries, which produced a damages award exceeding $660M and was listed among the National Law Journal's "Top 100 Verdicts."
PTAB / IPR experience. His tracked docket includes one PTAB-side appearance (Unified Patents v. Carma Technology Ltd.), so IPR experience exists but is not a large standalone part of his personal docket based on available sources. McKool Smith maintains a substantial IPR practice — for example, it represents Greenthread as patent owner in a series of IPRs brought by onsemi and Texas Instruments (IPR2023-01242/01243/01244, IPR2024-00672–00774) — but those filings name other McKool Smith attorneys (e.g., Alan Whitehurst, Nicholas Matich, Arvind Jairam) as lead counsel; I could not verify Baxter as counsel of record in those proceedings. I also could not confirm he is a registered patent attorney.
Bar / education. Admitted in Texas (1970; State Bar No. 01938000); also admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, the First and Fifth Circuits, and the N.D./E.D./S.D./W.D. of Texas. J.D., University of Texas School of Law (1970); B.A., University of Texas at Austin (1967). Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers.
Sourcing note: background and outcomes drawn from McKool Smith's bio, Benchmark Litigation, Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers, IAM Patent 1000, Best Lawyers/Benchmark "Trial Aces," Global Legal Post's retirement report, and PTAB docket records. Verdict figures for PanOptis/Apple and the Meta settlement are as reported by his firm bio and Global Legal Post; I did not independently confirm the underlying judgments.
Firms
Roles
- Counsel3
- lead counsel3
- Attorney1
- Lead Counsel1
- Counsel of Record1
- Local Counsel1
Cases (10)
- Δ defendantAdvanced Coding Technologies LLC v. UndisclosedMcKool Smith · lead counsel
- π plaintiffCarma Technology Corp. et al. v. Uber Technologies Inc. et al.McKool Smith · lead counsel
- Δ defendantGoogle LLC v. Secure Communication Technologies, LLCMcKool Smith · lead counsel
- π plaintiffGreenthread LLC v. Texas Instruments IncorporatedMcKool Smith · Counsel of Record
- Δ defendantTexas Instruments Inc. v. Greenthread, LLCMcKool Smith · Counsel
- Δ defendantUnified Patents v. Carma Technology Ltd.McKool Smith · Attorney
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMcKool Smith · Counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMcKool Smith · Lead Counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMcKool Smith · Counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMcKool Smith · Local Counsel