Dunn & Black

I'll research this firm before writing. Let me run several searches in parallel.

Good initial data. Let me verify a few key points: the firm's footprint, its IP practice description, its role in the Rare Breed matter, and PTAB activity.

Dunn & Black, P.S. — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Firm overview. Dunn & Black, P.S. is a litigation boutique founded in Spokane, Washington in 1991 by John C. Black and Robert A. Dunn. Its principal office is at 111 N. Post Street, Suite 300, Spokane. The firm's U.S. News–Best Lawyers profile lists a second address at 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100, Seattle, and reports roughly 10 lawyers, including six partners — though that same profile anomalously lists Seattle as headquarters, while the firm's own site and other directories treat Spokane as the main office. By any measure this is not a BigLaw firm or an IP boutique; it is a regional commercial-litigation shop. No AmLaw 200 or Chambers ranking for the firm surfaced in the sources reviewed. Its best-sourced recognition is U.S. News–Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" Tier 1 placement in commercial litigation and eminent domain/condemnation, plus individual Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers listings (e.g., Black, Dunn, Wetmore).

IP litigation specialty. The firm does not hold itself out as a patent litigation practice. Its advertised areas are construction law, business/commercial litigation, real estate, eminent domain/condemnation, insurance coverage, employment and civil rights, and catastrophic personal injury. Intellectual property appears only as an ancillary line item carried by individual attorneys rather than as a department: Susan C. Nelson's bio lists intellectual property among her civil litigation areas, and she earned a patent, software, copyright and technology law concentration at Case Western Reserve. The one tracked patent matter involves mechanical fire-control technology — forced-reset firearm triggers — not Wi-Fi standards, pharmaceuticals, software, or semiconductors. There is no public evidence of a standards-essential, life-sciences, or semiconductor patent practice.

Side preference. The tracked data show a single appearance, on the plaintiff side, in a local-counsel role. That is a thin basis for characterizing the firm's side preference, and it should be read conservatively: the only patent case on record is on the patent-owner side, and in a venue/fee-support capacity rather than as lead substantive counsel. Nothing in the public record indicates a specialty in NPE/PAE assertion or in defending operating companies against patent claims; the firm's broader self-description is that it represents both plaintiffs and defendants in civil litigation generally.

Notable cases and outcomes. The tracked matter is Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. et al. v. Superior Firearms of Texas, LLC, No. 2:26-cv-00058 (E.D. Tex., filed Jan. 22, 2026), asserting U.S. Patent Nos. 12,038,247 and 12,031,784 against a reseller of forced-reset triggers. The case is one small piece of a very large campaign: plaintiffs ABC IP, LLC and Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. have filed more than 130 suits since May 2025, according to Bloomberg Law's docket analysis. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized six of those actions into MDL No. 3176, In re Rare Breed Triggers Patent Litigation, before Chief District Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas (April 2, 2026 order), with related preliminary-injunction litigation and Federal Circuit appeals (e.g., Hoffman Tactical) and counter-claims by Atrius Development Group seeking invalidity, inequitable conduct, and antitrust relief. The campaign has attracted unusual attention because of a DOJ statement of interest tying private enforcement to the May 2025 settlement of United States v. Rare Breed Triggers (E.D.N.Y.). One caveat on the firm's role: in the docket records retrieved, plaintiffs' lead counsel is Fish & Richardson (Matthew A. Colvin), with Gillam & Smith LLP (Melissa R. Smith, Marshall, Tex.) appearing as local counsel. I could not independently confirm a Dunn & Black notice of appearance in the E.D. Tex. docket, so its local-counsel role rests on the case database rather than a verified docket entry.

PTAB / IPR practice and key personnel. No public evidence of an IPR, PGR, or broader PTAB practice surfaced — the firm does not market AIA trial work, and the Rare Breed dispute is being fought in district court (validity, inequitable conduct) and on appeal rather than at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. No filing volume can be reported because none is publicly documented. The firm's publicly recognized partners are its co-founders John C. Black (construction) and Robert A. Dunn (commercial/employment litigation), along with Rick Wetmore and Ryan D. Poole — none identified as a patent litigator. Susan C. Nelson is the only attorney linked to the tracked patent case, and she left the firm in March 2026 to join Kutak Rock LLP's Spokane office as of counsel in its litigation group. The material takeaway is that Dunn & Black currently has no publicly identified resident patent-litigation partner; its one tracked patent appearance is best understood as occasional local-counsel support for a national patent campaign led by a dedicated IP firm.