Stamatios "Sam" Stamoulis

I'll research this attorney's background and verify the case information before drafting.

Let me dig into the specific cases and PTAB/bar details.

Stamatios "Sam" Stamoulis — Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC (Wilmington, Delaware)

Focus areas. Stamoulis is a Delaware-based patent litigator whose docket runs across two distinct technology clusters. On the plaintiff side, his tracked cases involve software and data-processing patents (Cyberfone Systems' telephone/data-transaction patents; K. Mizra v. Rapid7 in cybersecurity), networking and wireless (Novacloud v. Comcast; Portus Singapore v. Reolink), IoT/smart-home and consumer electronics (IoT Innovations v. Resideo; Chemtron Research v. Toyota), and AI-driven retail analytics (Alpha Modus v. Cooler Screens). Separately, he maintains a substantial Hatch-Waxman/ANDA practice representing generic manufacturers in the District of Delaware, appearing for Mylan in the In re Ozempic (Semaglutide) MDL, for HEC Pharm in Novartis litigation, and for MSN Pharmaceuticals in the Entresto and Sanofi disputes. That pharma work is not reflected in the tracked case list but is documented in court and USPTO filings.

Side preference. The tracked data show a clear plaintiff-side orientation: 8 of 10 appearances are for patent-assertion plaintiffs, and in 6 of those he is lead counsel — the classic NPE/patent-monetization model of Delaware filings on behalf of licensing entities (Cyberfone, Alpha Modus, IoT Innovations, K. Mizra, Portus, Chemtron). His two defendant-side appearances (Disintermediation Services v. Bank of America; DISH DBS v. FuboTV) are both as local counsel, and his pharma defense work is likewise typically Delaware local-counsel representation rather than national lead defense. He therefore works both sides but with a pronounced plaintiff/lead-counsel tilt, using local-counsel defense roles as a secondary practice.

Notable matters. His most prominent tracked matters are the Cyberfone Systems campaign (asserted against AT&T, U.S. Bancorp, and dozens of others) and DISH DBS v. FuboTV. The Cyberfone litigation ended adversely: the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment that U.S. Patent No. 8,019,060 was invalid under § 101 in Cyberfone Systems, LLC v. CNN Interactive Group, Inc., 558 F. App'x 988 (Fed. Cir. 2014) — an early and frequently cited post-Bilski eligibility decision that knocked out the campaign patent. He also appeared for plaintiff WhitServe LLC in its appeals, in which the Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal with prejudice against Donuts Inc. and Name.com (Fed. Cir. No. 19-2240, April 2020). The Alpha Modus retail-analytics campaign is active, with new suits filed through late 2025. On the defense side, his MSN clients lost a January 2026 issue-preclusion summary judgment ruling in the Entresto litigation (D. Del. No. 25-cv-81-RGA). No plaintiff-side verdict or settlement recoveries for him could be verified from public sources.

PTAB / IPR experience. Public records show his involvement in IPR proceedings chiefly as counsel of record in the parallel district court cases — for example, he is listed as courtesy-copy recipient and district-court counsel in IPRs concerning U.S. Patent No. 7,689,706 and in Novo Nordisk/Ozempic-related PTAB filings. The available record does not show him as a frequent standalone PTAB petitioner or patent owner lead counsel, so his IPR practice appears ancillary to district court litigation rather than a primary specialty.

Bar and education. J.D., Rutgers University School of Law (1999); H.B.A., University of Delaware (1996). Admitted in New Jersey (1999), New York (2000), and Delaware (2004), and registered to practice before the USPTO (2001); Delaware Bar No. 4606. Martindale and South Carolina-based profiles both identify him as a Wilmington, Delaware practitioner with no evidence of a same-name competitor in patent litigation. His entire tracked patent docket is at Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, where he is a name partner; no prior firm history was verifiable from reliable sources.