Thomas A. Broughan III

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

Thomas A. Broughan III — Partner, Morrison Foerster (IP Litigation Group and Life Sciences + Healthcare practice), Washington, D.C.

Focus areas. Broughan's practice is IP litigation — high-stakes patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation in district courts, with extensive Patent Trial and Appeal Board, International Trade Commission, and arbitration experience. Firm descriptions and his matter history place him across medical devices/medtech and life sciences, software, telecommunications, cryptography, signal processing, gaming, and digital rights management. That breadth matches the tracked matters: casino-gaming patents (Evolution Malta Limited v. Light & Wonder, Inc.), consumer-electronics/gaming hardware (Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al. v. Resonant Systems Inc.), and PTAB work on medical-device, neuromodulation, and networking patents.

Side preference. The tracked docket is evenly split — 3 plaintiff-side and 3 defendant-side appearances — and the broader record is genuinely two-sided. He defends large operating companies in infringement and IPR proceedings (Nintendo; Auris Health; Nevro; Apple), while also representing patent owners and plaintiffs in affirmative enforcement (Evolution Malta as plaintiff against Light & Wonder; Dexcom in its non-infringement appeal). He is not a dedicated NPE/PAE-side or defense-only practitioner; the PTAB portion of the practice skews toward petitioner-side challenges for technology and medtech clients.

Firm context. Broughan spent roughly a decade at Sidley Austin in Washington, D.C., where most of the tracked appearances sit, before moving with Ching-Lee Fukuda to Morrison Foerster, announced June 9, 2026 (MoFo's D.C. office). Note that the tracked case list reflects the Sidley period and does not yet capture the MoFo move. He is a registered patent attorney (USPTO Reg. No. 66,001) and was admitted in Virginia (2009) and the District of Columbia (2013), per Martindale. Education is not reliably sourced in the materials I could reach, so I've omitted it.

Notable matters and PTAB experience. He has handled more than 80 IPRs over his career and regularly serves as lead counsel in PTAB proceedings (e.g., Apple v. MemoryWeb; Boston Scientific v. Nevro; multiple Auris Health v. Intuitive Surgical IPRs, including the proceedings remanded by the Federal Circuit in 2022 that ended in statutory disclaimer and adverse judgment). He appeared on the Federal Circuit brief in Braemar Manufacturing, LLC v. Infobionic, Inc. (affirmed, May 8, 2018), and in 2022 a case he argued was part of a trio of Federal Circuit arguments decided the same day in the same client's favor, receiving the LMG Life Sciences Patent Impact Case of the Year award. He was also part of Apple's counsel team in ContentGuard v. Apple (E.D. Tex.), where Judge Gilstrap approved a roughly $420,000 bill of costs.

Caveat: one tracked plaintiff-side appearance is listed under the firm "Borghesani & Tabizon," which I could not corroborate through public sources; treat that entry as unverified.