Vincent J. Egolf

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Vincent J. Egolf — patent litigation profile (preliminary; single tracked appearance)

Specialty / focus. Egolf's one tracked patent matter is EcoFactor, Inc. v. Emerson Electric Co., where he appears for the plaintiff as of counsel at Egolf + Ferlic + Martinez + Harwood. That case sits in the "smart thermostat" / networked-HVAC technology space: EcoFactor's asserted portfolio (e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,423,322; 8,019,567; 10,612,983; 8,596,550; 8,886,488, and the ’327/’488 family) claims computerized comparison of indoor and outdoor temperature data to estimate rates of change and manage HVAC demand response — i.e., software/data-analytics and IoT-adjacent subject matter rather than mechanical or life-sciences work. With only one tracked appearance, no broader technology pattern can be responsibly drawn; there is no public practice description of an intellectual-property practice for him on the firm's site, and I could not verify a personal patent-prosecution or IP-litigation portfolio.

Side preference. 1 plaintiff-side appearance, 0 defendant-side. On this record he works the patent-owner side, not the operating-company defense side. EcoFactor is a patent-holding/monetization company (widely described in coverage as a non-practicing entity) that ran a multi-front campaign against thermostat and HVAC manufacturers, so this is patentee-side enforcement rather than a defense practice. A single data point is not a reliable indicator of preference.

Firm context. His listed firm, Egolf + Ferlic + Martinez + Harwood, LLC (123 W. San Francisco St., Santa Fe, NM), is a general plaintiff-side trial firm whose publicized practice is personal injury, wrongful death, medical malpractice, civil rights, employment, and family law — not a patent boutique. The name also appears in some directories as "Egolf + Ferlic + Martinez + Cox." That profile is consistent with an of-counsel IP/litigation role rather than a firm-wide patent practice. I could not verify any prior firms relevant to patent work.

Notable cases / outcomes, and PTAB-IPR. The Emerson matter is the entire tracked docket, and I found no verified docket entry, verdict, or settlement specific to it. The related EcoFactor campaign is well documented: the ITC investigation (337-TA-1258) naming Emerson Electric among respondents; Emerson's Delaware declaratory-judgment action (1:21-cv-00317); and EcoFactor v. Google, where a W.D. Tex. jury awarded $20,019,300 (May 2022), a Federal Circuit panel affirmed, the en banc court then vacated the damages award and ordered a new trial on damages (May 2025), and the Supreme Court denied certiorari (Oct. 20, 2025); the PTAB/ex parte reexamination of the ’488 patent was affirmed against EcoFactor by the Federal Circuit (Jan. 21, 2026). Whether Egolf personally participated in any IPR, PGR, or ITC proceeding is not verified — EcoFactor was a frequent PTAB and ITC participant, but I found no record of him appearing in those fora.

Bar / education. Not reliably sourced; omitted. Disambiguation caution: a "Vincent S. Egolf" (USPTO Reg. No. 51131) practices patent prosecution in Hudsonville, Michigan, and a "Vince Egolf" has served as IP counsel at Perrigo Company — these appear to be a different individual from the Santa Fe litigator tracked here, and the record does not confirm any connection.