Ajay S. Krishnan

Judge Profile: Ajay S. Krishnan

U.S. Magistrate Judge, Northern District of California

Magistrate Judge Ajay S. Krishnan joined the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in early 2026, sitting in the Oakland division. His appointment followed the retirement of Chief Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Before joining the bench, Judge Krishnan was a long-serving partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters, LLP, where he spent two decades, including 15 years as a partner. His practice was broad, encompassing significant intellectual property and patent litigation, alongside complex commercial disputes and civil rights cases. He has extensive trial experience, having tried more than a dozen cases. Judge Krishnan's technical background includes a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from Rice University, and he earned his law degree from Harvard Law School.

Given his recent appointment, Judge Krishnan's patent docket is still in its early stages of development. While a high volume of patent cases is typical for the Northern District of California, his individual docket remains light as of April 2026. Before his appointment, Judge Krishnan served on the Northern District of California's Patent Local Rules Committee, a role he continues to hold. This deep familiarity with the district's specialized rules suggests he will expect strict compliance with their requirements for early disclosure of infringement and invalidity contentions. His background in electrical engineering may also provide a sophisticated understanding of cases involving computer and bio-engineering technologies.

As a new member of the bench, Judge Krishnan has not yet authored any significant patent-related rulings or established a public track record on claim construction or other substantive patent law issues. The tracked case of Mems Innovations LLC v. TDK Corp et al. was assigned to him in April 2026, shortly after its transfer to the district, marking one of his first patent case assignments. His prior experience as a litigator, where he represented both plaintiffs and defendants, provides him with a balanced perspective from both sides of a patent dispute.

Judge Krishnan has published a Civil Standing Order that governs general case procedures before him. This order emphasizes compliance with Federal Rules, the Northern District's Local Rules, and the district's Guidelines for Professional Conduct. He has also issued a specific standing order for settlement conferences, which are typically held in person and require parties to lodge detailed settlement conference statements fourteen days prior to the conference. This order underscores a proactive approach to facilitating settlement discussions. Litigants should anticipate a jurist who is well-versed in the procedural intricacies of the district's patent rules and who actively manages cases toward resolution.