DLA Piper (US)

I'll research DLA Piper's IP litigation practice and verify key facts.

Firm overview. DLA Piper (US) is the US arm of DLA Piper, one of the largest law firms in the world, with its US operations headquartered in New York and roughly 26 US offices. The firm overall reports a footprint of approximately 86 offices across 43 countries, and ILRG's 2025 headcount data lists DLA Piper at No. 2 among the largest US law firms by attorney count (~4,800 attorneys, ~1,378 partners), squarely placing it in the BigLaw tier rather than the IP-boutique tier. It is a fixture in the AmLaw 100 (consistently among the largest firms by both headcount and revenue) and holds Chambers USA rankings in nearly 30 practices nationwide. Its IP practice is large but is one part of a broad full-service disputes and transactions platform, not the firm's defining identity.

IP litigation specialty. The firm's patent litigation group is best known for defending electronics, computer science, telecommunications and wireless, semiconductor, medical device, pharmaceutical/biotech, automotive, and materials/chemical engineering matters — a technology breadth that matches both the firm's own practice description and the tracked case list. Chambers USA 2026 describes the practice as handling ITC and district court patent litigation with "a notable patent defense practice" and a growing PTAB focus, and flags strengths in medical devices, life sciences, and automotive (including a Toyota Motor six-patent MDL work highlight). Legal 500 US 2025 ranks DLA Piper Tier 1 nationally in Patents: Litigation (International Trade Commission) and Tier 2 in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage, and Chambers USA 2026 ranks it Band 2 for Life Sciences: IP/Patent Litigation in California. World IP Review's 2025 US patent profile notes the firm is routinely cited among the top US firms most frequently hired to defend patent litigation and reports more than 50 of its lawyers are registered with the USPTO.

Side preference. Predominantly defense-side. Of the 17 tracked appearances, 15 are for defendants and only 2 for plaintiffs, and nearly all are recorded as lead counsel or counsel. That mirrors external data: Patexia's Patent Litigation Intelligence Report (sixth edition, covering July 2020–June 2025) ranked DLA Piper as the No. 2 most active firm representing defendants and No. 2 most active overall, and the firm's own practice page cites Lex Machina 2024 for the proposition that it defends more US district court patent cases than any other full-service firm. The two plaintiff-side tracked matters are an ANDA/Hatch-Waxman action (Neurelis, Inc. v. Padagis LLC, where the firm acted as local counsel) and Velocity Communication Technologies v. HP Enterprise, an outlier given that the firm simultaneously defended HP Inc. and Aruba Networks in related Velocity Communication Technologies suits.

Notable cases and outcomes. The most prominent tracked matters include two VideoLabs, Inc. cases against Apple (E.D. Cal.), in which the firm represented Apple; the lead VideoLabs action terminated by stipulated dismissal with prejudice with each side bearing its own fees — a defense win for Apple, though the patents remain enforceable against other parties. Other tracked matters span mechanically oriented and consumer-product disputes (Baby Jogger v. Evenflo, Collective Minds Gaming v. Ironburg Inventions, Orthosie Systems v. SVR, RICMIC v. Sentrics) and pharmaceutical litigation (Veloxis Pharmaceuticals v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, D. Del., filed 2025). Publicly reported results worth noting: Chambers cites DLA Piper's representation of Home Depot in a nine-patent, $200M-plus dispute against Lynk Labs; the firm secured a May 2025 PTAB ruling invalidating a Cleveland Medical Devices sleep-apnea patent for ResMed; and Erin Gibson served as first-chair ITC trial counsel for NXP Semiconductors in an April 2024 investigation that was withdrawn less than a week before trial, producing a walk-away win.

PTAB / IPR practice. The firm maintains a real, but not specialty-leading, post-grant practice. Chambers USA 2026 highlights its "increased focus on PTAB proceedings," and ranked James Heintz (Band 3, PTAB practice, electronics/telecom/semiconductor) for that work; Larissa Bifano, US chair of the firm's Patent Development & Strategy practice, has been recognized on the PTAB Bar Association's "Top 50 Women in PTAB Trials." Third-party tracker LexDana maps roughly 520 PTAB matters for the firm and places it in the top 20 nationally for IPR/PTAB activity, but that figure comes from an automated public-records aggregator rather than an audited Patexia- or firm-reported count, so treat the precise number as directional. Patexia's 2025 PTAB intelligence excerpt (cited in an unrelated PTAB proceeding) lists several DLA Piper clients — ResMed, Toyota, Home Depot, NXP, Dyson — among the most active petitioners, consistent with a defense-driven IPR practice.

Key partners / practice leaders. Reliable public sources identify: Sean C. Cunningham (Partner, Washington, DC) — Global Co-Chair and US Chair of the firm's Intellectual Property & Technology practice, a first-chair trial lawyer with ITC and district court experience for Microsoft, Lenovo, and Motorola; Erin P. Gibson (Partner, Washington, DC) — Global Co-Chair of the firm's Technology sector and chair of its ITC practice, with 50-plus ITC cases and ranked No. 1 most active/best-performing ITC attorney for respondents in Patexia's 2026 ITC report; John M. Guaragna (Partner, Austin) — Texas Chair of the IP & Technology practice, ranked No. 1 patent litigator for defendants and No. 1 overall in Patexia's 2026 Patent Litigation Intelligence Report; and Matthew Satchwell (Partner, Chicago) — global co-chair of the firm's patent litigation practice, alongside Milan-based Gualtiero Dragotti. Other frequently ranked names in the firm's patent bench include Brian K. Erickson (Austin), Michael D. Jay (Los Angeles), Jennifer Nall (Austin), Helena Kiepura (Washington, DC), and Larissa Bifano (Boston). One caveat on stability: World IP Review's 2025 profile notes 2025 departures from the patent group, including several partners who had joined from Dentons in 2023, so the bench has seen some lateral churn.