William Woodford

I'll research this attorney to verify background and practice details.

Let me verify the specific tracked cases and the Halo Electronics appeal outcomes.

Let me verify the Wasica/GlaxoSmithKline outcomes and check for defendant-side work.

Practice focus. William R. Woodford is a Minneapolis-based IP trial lawyer whose patent work spans electrical/electronics and mechanical arts, software-based automotive technology, and life sciences. His docket runs from surface-mount electronic packages and tire-pressure monitoring systems to vehicle infotainment/connectivity software (Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, "Google built-in") and pharmaceutical method-of-treatment and spinal-implant patents. Firm and third-party bios (Avantech, IAM Strategy 300, Best Lawyers) describe him as a high-stakes patent litigator with an electrical-engineering background who also handles IP licensing, valuation and portfolio strategy. He is not a registered USPTO patent prosecutor; his practice is litigation, appeals and PTAB appearances.

Side preference. He works principally for patent owners/plaintiffs. Both tracked appearances are plaintiff-side for Avantech Law — AutoConnect Holdings LLC v. General Motors LLC (pro hac vice) and a second AutoConnect matter (lead counsel) — and the verifiable high-dollar results in his background are also patent-owner representations (Halo, Wasica, GSK, Moskowitz Family). His 20-year tenure at Fish & Richardson, a defense-heavy IP firm, suggests some mixed-side exposure, but I did not find well-sourced defendant-side patent work to confirm a genuine two-sided practice.

Firm context. He founded Avantech Law LLP in 2021 (Minneapolis), where he is partner and founder. Before that he spent nearly 20 years at Fish & Richardson P.C. as a principal, co-founding that firm's contingent/alternative-fee practice and serving on its finance committee.

Notable matters. He was co-lead trial counsel for Halo Electronics in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., the 2016 unanimous Supreme Court decision (Roberts, C.J.) that discarded the Seagate test and loosened the standard for enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284; he also handled the associated appeals. As lead trial counsel for Wasica in Wasica Finance GmbH v. Schrader Int'l (D. Del.) he obtained a $31.2M induced/contributory-infringement jury verdict (reported as a $43M judgment) and a summary-judgment ruling on IPR estoppel that is described as the first of its kind. He led the damages team and served as trial counsel for GlaxoSmithKline in GSK v. Teva (D. Del.), where a June 2017 jury found willful infringement of the carvedilol heart-failure patent and awarded $235M. At Avantech he represents patent owner Moskowitz Family LLC against Medtronic (D. Minn.) and AutoConnect Holdings against GM (E.D. Tex.), Toyota (E.D. Tex.) and Ford (D. Del.).

PTAB/IPR. He appears in post-grant proceedings as backup counsel, not lead. USPTO filings list him as a provisionally recognized PTAB attorney eligible for automatic pro hac vice admission, with appearances in IPR2026-00124 (Moskowitz Family v. Medtronic, '797 patent, backup counsel), IPR2025-01342, IPR2025-01383 and PGR2025-00041. He is not a registered practitioner before the Office.

Bar/education. Admitted in Minnesota (2002) and Massachusetts; also admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit, the Eighth Circuit, and the District of Minnesota, District of Colorado, and Western District of Wisconsin. J.D., University of Minnesota (2002); B.S., Electrical Engineering, Marquette University (1998).

Caveats: the tracked entry "AutoConnect Holdings LLC v. Unknown" carries an unidentified defendant and is not independently verifiable; the other AutoConnect filings above are drawn from docket records. The outcome/fee-shifting characterizations of the Wasica and GSK results come from the firm's own case descriptions and should be confirmed against the underlying judgments before reuse.