Shannon Marie Dacus

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Shannon Marie Dacus — The Dacus Firm, P.C. (Tyler, Texas)

Focus areas. Dacus is a Tyler, Texas trial lawyer whose practice combines general commercial litigation with patent litigation; she is listed as the key contact for The Dacus Firm's intellectual-property practice in Chambers USA, which describes the firm as an E.D. Tex. trial boutique handling a range of patent cases. The technology mix in the matters she has been associated with skews toward telecommunications and networking — Network Functions Virtualization / distributed mobile architecture (4G/5G core networks) in the Lemko matter, and Wi-Fi 802.11 standards-essential patents in Ericsson v. D-Link — along with computer hardware/software and consumer-facing defendants (Dell, Blockbuster) and, at the firm level, battery technology (Ningde Amperex). Her own firm's site states it has appeared in hundreds of E.D. Tex. patent cases, as both local and lead counsel.

Side preference and role. The tracked appearance data show two appearances, both on the defendant side (0 plaintiff / 2 defendant), in a local-counsel capacity. That is consistent with the pattern visible in the docket record: she has entered as additional/local counsel for operating-company defendants in E.D. Tex. patent suits — Dell in Ericsson v. D-Link (6:10-cv-00473) and Adjustacam v. Amazon (6:10-cv-00329), Blockbuster in Eolas v. Adobe (6:09-cv-00446, then at Ramey & Flock), and Viavi in EXFO v. Viavi (2:15-cv-01685). The firm's docket is not exclusively defense-side (it has represented a plaintiff, Ningde Amperex, in a battery-patent action that reached the Federal Circuit), so the accurate characterization is a defense-leaning local-counsel practice rather than a strictly one-sided one.

Elected case / current matter. The most prominent tracked case is Lemko Corporation v. AT&T Inc. et al, No. 2:25-cv-00305 (E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap), filed March 17, 2025, in which Lemko asserts distributed-mobile-architecture/NFV patents against AT&T's Private 5G Edge offering; AT&T's lead counsel is Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, with The Dacus Firm serving locally. Judge Gilstrap denied AT&T's first-to-file transfer motion to the N.D. Tex. on March 6, 2026. Parallel PTAB activity includes Microsoft/AT&T v. Lemko, IPR2025-01142 (patent owner sought discretionary denial under Fintiv and § 325(d)) and the earlier Microsoft v. Lemko, IPR2023-00530 (institution denied). The second tracked appearance is not identified in the underlying dataset, so no case-specific detail can be confirmed for it. The firm-side Ericsson v. D-Link litigation (E.D. Tex. jury verdict of roughly $8 million in aggregate royalties across defendants) produced the Federal Circuit's frequently cited RAND-royalty opinion, Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems, Inc., 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Dacus's role there was as counsel for Dell on the defense team, not lead appellate counsel.

PTAB, bar and education. Her PTAB footprint appears occasional rather than a core practice: she is listed as counsel of record in AIA-related filings arising out of the Ningde Amperex battery dispute (which reached the Federal Circuit as No. 25-1037) and appears in the counsel listings connected with the Lemko IPR record, but the tracked district-court data do not show her as a recurring IPR petitioner or patent-owner representative. She is a member of the State Bar of Texas (Bar No. 00791004, practicing since 1994), with a J.D. from Baylor University School of Law (1994) and a B.A. from the University of Texas at San Antonio (1990); she previously practiced at Ramey & Flock, P.C. in Tyler. Sources: firm website, Chambers USA profile, Martindale, Texas Bar Foundation blog, CourtListener/Justia dockets, and PTAB filings.

A caveat: several details above (the untitled second tracked case, the precise scope of her PTAB involvement) rest on incomplete records, and I have flagged them rather than filling them in.