Shriprasad Palikhe

Practice summary — Shriprasad Palikhe

Specialty / focus areas. The authoritative tracked record contains a single patent case, Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Valve Corporation, in which Mr. Palikhe appears for the defendant, Valve. Cases of this name and party pairing have generally involved standards-related wireless/communications patents asserted against a hardware/consumer-platform defendant, so his tracked patent work sits at the intersection of standards-based technology and infringement defense rather than pharma or mechanical arts. That characterization rests on the case posture itself; I was unable to locate a public practice-page description or other searchable source confirming a defined technical specialty, so any broader technology range is not documented here.

Side preference. On the one appearance in the dataset he is on the defendant side (0 plaintiff / 1 defendant), defending an operating company against a patent-assertion entity. That is a single data point and should not be read as a firm statement of side preference across his career — there is no tracked record of him representing NPE/PAE plaintiffs, nor enough appearances to establish a pattern in either direction.

Firm context. He is listed as of counsel at Locke Lord in the tracked matter. I found no verifiable public source describing earlier firm affiliations or any prior in-house role, so prior-firm history is unknown from the sources available.

Notable cases / outcomes; PTAB / IPR. The only notable tracked matter is Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Valve Corporation (defense of Valve). I could not verify a verdict, settlement, Federal Circuit appeal, or IPR/PGR participation tied to him through web search, and there is no indication in the available record that he appears regularly before the PTAB.

Bar / education. Not reliably sourced in this review; omitted rather than estimated.

Caveat: Mr. Palikhe's name returned no hits on firm, court-opinion, Law360, Reuters, or Justia searches in this session, so the above is drawn almost entirely from the structured case list. Facts marked as unverified above (technical focus, prior firms, PTAB activity, bar admission, and education) should be confirmed directly before use.