Victor Palace

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Good baseline. Let me dig into the specific tracked cases and PTAB work.

Victor M. Palace — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus. Palace is a Washington, DC–based associate at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, where his practice centers on patent litigation in U.S. district courts and Section 337 investigations at the ITC. His firm profile describes work spanning computer software, AI/machine learning, consumer electronics, and mechanical devices, with industry experience in consumer products, e-commerce, and telecommunications; he also handles trade secret claims and does some patent prosecution and portfolio work (AI, communications platforms, medical software). His technical credentials—a B.S. in electrical engineering and programming background—are reflected in docket-level work on source code review and computer-vision/code-intense matters. The tracked docket is consistent with that description: video/imaging and optics, computer vision, data security software, and VR/AR software.

Side preference. The tracked list (2 plaintiff-side, 3 defendant-side appearances) skews defense, and the verifiable cases largely bear that out—he has represented hardware vendors, a bank, and a government agency against infringement claims. He is not, however, a one-sided practitioner: he is listed among plaintiff's counsel in CurioXR, Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., an April 2026 assertion of VR hand-tracking patents against Meta in the Western District of Texas. On the record available, he is better characterized as a both-sides litigator whose docket is weighted toward defending operating companies, with plaintiff-side work for smaller technology owners. There is no evidence that he regularly represents NPEs/PAEs as a business model.

Notable matters and outcomes. (1) VDPP, LLC v. Axis Communications, Inc., No. 2:24-cv-00727 (E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap)—defense of Axis in an imaging/video patent suit; after Finnegan filed a Rule 12(b)(6)/12(b)(3) motion to dismiss, VDPP voluntarily dismissed all claims without prejudice on January 31, 2025. No merits ruling issued, so the patents remain enforced by VDPP elsewhere. (2) Pavemetrics Systems, Inc. v. Tetra Tech, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-01289 (C.D. Cal., Judge Scarsi)—defense of Tetra Tech in a computer-vision railway track inspection case; Palace appeared pro hac vice and is visible in the docket on source-code inspection and discovery disputes. (3) DigitalDoors, Inc. v. PlainsCapital Bank, No. 2:24-cv-00778 (E.D. Tex.)—defense of PlainsCapital on data security/disaster recovery claims. (4) Return Mail, Inc. v. USPS, No. 1:11-cv-00130 (Fed. Cl., Judge Lettow)—representation of the Postal Service in a long-running Court of Federal Claims suit, resulting in summary judgment that the asserted patent was invalid. (5) CurioXR v. Meta (W.D. Tex.), asserting U.S. Pat. Nos. 11,531,448 and 11,656,742; the case is in early discovery with venue-transfer briefing, a January 2027 Markman hearing, and trial set for February 2028—no outcome to report. Caveat: the Return Mail and CurioXR results are drawn from firm/docket sources, and no reported verdicts or Federal Circuit opinions name Palace personally.

PTAB/IPR. I found no verified PTAB proceeding listing Palace as counsel; treat his PTAB trial experience as unclear and unverified. What is documented is firm-level thought leadership he co-authored or presented: "Trending at the PTAB: 1 Year of Denials of Institution" (Law360, July 2024) and a November 2024 webinar on IPR/PGR institution denials and final written decisions in electrical and mechanical arts, plus Federal Circuit blog commentary.

Bar / education. Admitted in the District of Columbia and Maryland and registered with the USPTO (Reg. No. 78214); J.D. cum laude, University of Florida College of Law (2019); B.S., Electrical Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder (2016). All five tracked appearances list him as lead counsel; the "Finnegan" entry in the case list is the same firm, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, so there is no evidence of prior employer history relevant to his patent litigation career.