Ted M. Cannon

I'll research Ted M. Cannon's professional background and patent litigation practice.

Let me verify the notable case outcomes and PTAB leadership details.

Ted M. Cannon — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus. Cannon is a first-chair-capable IP litigation partner at Knobbe Martens whose practice spans patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret disputes in federal district courts, the ITC, the Federal Circuit, and the PTAB. Public firm descriptions and prosecution records place him in computer/software (e-commerce, business methods, § 101 issues), mechanical devices, financial services, and medical-device technologies. USPTO records show heavy prosecution-side work for Skyworks Solutions, Amazon Technologies, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, Masimo, Palantir, and Smith & Nephew. Recent PTAB work has involved pulse-oximetry/wearable medical devices (Masimo v. Apple) and welding equipment (Lincoln Global), in addition to the banking-services patents at issue in his tracked cases.

Side preference. His tracked docket skews defense (4 defendant / 1 plaintiff), but that framing is misleading because all five matters involve Intellectual Ventures II LLC: he represented patent owner IV as plaintiff against Huntington Bancshares, and served as back-up counsel alongside IV in declaratory-judgment actions brought against it by IBM, Compass Bank, and J.P. Morgan Chase. Read alongside his Masimo ITC work, his practice is genuinely bilateral—he both enforces patents for operating-company owners and defends against infringement and validity challenges. He should not be characterized as an NPE-only or defense-only practitioner.

Firm context. Cannon has spent his entire career at Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP (Knobbe Martens), joining in 2002 and becoming a partner in 2008; he works out of the Orange County/Irvine office and has no reported prior-firm history. He chairs (in some firm materials, co-chairs) the firm's PTAB Trials practice group.

Notable matters and outcomes. His most prominent matter is the long-running Masimo v. Apple dispute over Apple Watch pulse-oximetry technology, where he was part of the Knobbe team that secured the ITC's October 2023 limited exclusion order against Apple Watch Series 9/Ultra 2 models—reinstated by the Federal Circuit in January 2024 after a temporary stay. That enforcement effort later stalled as the ITC declined to extend the ban to Apple's redesigned blood-oxygen feature (2026), and Masimo separately obtained a roughly $634 million jury verdict in parallel district court litigation. In the IV matters he is listed only as back-up counsel, and no individual case outcomes for him were verifiable from public sources. He also reported a win as counsel of record in the Federal Circuit's 2015 affirmance of an IPR decision for Game Show Network.

PTAB / IPR experience. This is a signature part of his practice. He chairs the firm's PTAB trials group, appeared as counsel in IPRs for Masimo against Apple and for Lincoln Global, and was ranked by Patexia's 2018 IPR Intelligence Report as a Top 40 Best Performing IPR Attorney and Top 50 Most Active IPR Attorney. He publishes and speaks regularly on PTAB practice, including discretionary denial under Fintiv and the post-Advanced Bionics/General Plastics landscape.

Bar / education. Registered to practice before the USPTO (Reg. No. 55,036); admitted to the California bar (2002) and the Federal Circuit; J.D., Harvard Law School (2002); B.S. Computer Science, Brigham Young University (1999). (Bar and education details are sourced from Knobbe's own bio and State Bar of California records; the Patexia rankings and ITC/verdict figures come from firm announcements and legal-press coverage and were not independently confirmed in primary court records.)