Timothy P. Walker

I'll research this attorney's background before drafting.

Let me verify the tracked case and check for PTAB/Federal Circuit activity.

Timothy P. Walker — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Disambiguation note: This profile refers to Timothy Paar Walker, Ph.D. (California State Bar No. 105001; USPTO Reg. No. 41521), the San Francisco IP litigator at K&L Gates. His K&L Gates bio, Martindale profile, and 2009 Northern District of California filings (signed "Timothy Paar Walker," K&L Gates, San Francisco) are consistent and identify the same individual.

Specialty / focus. Walker's practice is patent litigation spanning computer software and hardware on one side and chemistry/life-sciences on the other. His firm bio identifies cases involving object-oriented and encryption software, databases, networking and wireless communications hardware/software, computer conferencing and monitors, chip design and packaging, medical imaging devices, enzymatic clinical assays, fermentation-based production of nutritional compounds, epoxy resins, robotics, and batteries. The tracked matter, Walker Digital, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. et al., is a software/e-commerce case. Web-sourced matters confirm real breadth: wireless (Novatel v. Franklin and ZTE on cellular Wi-Fi hotspot patents; SPH America v. Acer on wireless channel modulation), display and CPU technology, mechanical/consumer products (window blind mechanisms; robotic vacuums), and chemistry/biotech (Coenzyme Q10 fermentation; blood amino-acid assays).

Side preference. Predominantly defense-side representation of operating companies and product manufacturers. The structured data shows 0 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side tracked appearance, and that pattern is reinforced by the verified matter list: respondents and defendants such as BISSELL Homecare, ZMed, Axis-Shield, Shenzhou Biology, Ching Feng, Lite-On, Acer, Wistron, and Novatel. There is no indication of NPE/PAE-side enforcement work; his only plaintiff-side posture found in searches is declaratory-judgment representation of technology companies (Acer/Gateway in the TPL/Patriot litigation), which is a defensive strategy rather than assertion.

Firm context. The tracked appearance lists K&L Gates as the firm and "of counsel" as the role; his current K&L Gates San Francisco profile and Martindale both list him at the firm, where he has practiced for well over a decade based on filings from 2009 onward. Searches did not yield a reliably sourced account of his prior firm history, so earlier affiliations should be treated as unverified. There is no indication he has held an in-house position.

Notable matters and outcomes. Verifiable results from his firm bio include a defense verdict after jury trial for ZMed in Nomos Corp. v. ZMed, Inc. (D. Mass.), a 3D medical-imaging case that settled on appeal; a Commission-affirmed ITC finding of no violation in Certain Coenzyme Q10 Products (Inv. No. 337-TA-790) paired with a Federal Circuit ruling that affirmed in part and vacated in part a summary judgment of non-infringement (Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group Co., 790 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2015)), plus a successful Daubert challenge to the opposing technical expert; and an ITC finding of no violation, Commission-affirmed, in Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-853). In the tracked Walker Digital v. Microsoft line of litigation, the parallel Central District of California case ended in final judgment of non-infringement for Microsoft, Dell, and HP, affirmed on appeal (Walker Digital, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 484 F. App'x 496 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); the appellate briefs in that particular appeal were handled by other counsel, so Walker's specific role in that judgment is not established by the published record. He also represented BISSELL in the robotic vacuum ITC investigation (Inv. No. 337-TA-1057).

PTAB / IPR. Searches did not surface confirmed IPR, PGR, or CBM appearances by this attorney, and no PTAB filings are reflected in the tracked case data. His documented appellate and administrative practice is concentrated in the Federal Circuit and the ITC rather than the PTAB — this should be treated as "not verified" rather than a confirmed absence.

Bar / education. J.D., Stanford Law School, 1982; Ph.D., Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, 1981; B.S., University of Alabama in Huntsville, 1974. Admitted in California (1982) and before the USPTO, the Federal Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit, with admissions in several California district courts and the Eastern District of Texas.