Defendant
1 case as defendant.
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. — commonly "Mintz" or "Mintz Levin" — is a general-practice, full-service U.S. law firm founded in 1933 by Haskell Cohn and Benjamin Levin. It is headquartered at One Financial Center in Boston and maintains U.S. offices in Los Angeles, Miami, New York, San Diego, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., plus Toronto. It is a private professional corporation (not publicly traded); firm-published profiles describe roughly 500–600 attorneys, and it is listed among the Am Law 100. No revenue or employee figures beyond attorney headcount were verified from primary sources.
Operations. Mintz is an operating professional-services firm, not a patent holder or shell licensor. Its practices span corporate and securities, mergers and acquisitions, private equity, intellectual property (including patent litigation and PTAB proceedings), litigation, life sciences, health care, technology, bankruptcy and real estate. It derives revenue from legal fees, including alternative fee arrangements.
Litigation posture. In the tracked data Mintz appears once, as a defendant and zero times as a plaintiff — consistent with an operating company (here, a law firm) being sued rather than a non-practicing entity asserting patents. The single tracked matter is Parus Holdings, Inc. v. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., No. 1:25-cv-01722 (W.D. Tex., Austin Division, filed Oct. 24, 2025), docketed as an intellectual-property/torts matter. It is a legal malpractice suit, not a patent infringement claim against Mintz.
Case context. Former client Parus Holdings — an Austin-based voice-recognition company that has asserted patents against Apple, Google, Amazon, Samsung and LG — alleges Mintz negligently handled Patent Owners Responses in inter partes reviews of Parus's U.S. Patent No. 7,076,431 and, per Parus, caused invalidation upheld by the Federal Circuit in 2023. Named co-defendants are Mintz attorneys Michael T. Renaud and Michael J. McNamara. Days earlier, Mintz sued Parus in the District of Massachusetts seeking roughly $2.1 million in unpaid "success fees" tied to about $11.5 million in recoveries. Mintz has publicly disputed Parus's malpractice allegations; no merits determinations are reflected in the tracked filing.
Parus sued its former IP litigation counsel Mintz (including attorneys Renaud and McNamara) for professional negligence. The complaint alleges counsel's failure to properly present and cite antedating evidence in the '431 IPR caused invalidation of the '431 patent claims and reduced Parus's settlement/licensing values.