IHatePatent Trolls
Patents
Litigations
Representatives
PTAB
Resources
SearchAdmin
  1. Home
  2. /Representatives
  3. /Eversheds Sutherland (US)

Counsel registry

Eversheds Sutherland (US)

11 case appearances — 6 as plaintiff counsel · 5 as defendant counsel.

Attorneys

  • Nicola Anthony Pisano5
  • Scott Adam Penner5
  • Regis Calvin Worley, Jr.5
  • Cameron C. Murphy4
  • Ann G. Fort4
  • Michael J. Woodson2
  • Lindsay M. Kriz2
  • Anna C. Halsey2
  • Michael J. Behlen2
  • Jennifer R. Sandlin2

Roles

  • Counsel10
  • Backup Counsel9
  • Lead Counsel7
  • Attorney5
  • lead counsel5
  • counsel4
  • Attorney for Plaintiff1

Cases (11)

  • π plaintiffApplied Optoelectronics, Inc. v. Cambridge Industries USA, Inc.Nicola Anthony Pisano · Lead Counsel
  • Δ defendantApplied Optoelectronics, Inc. v. Cambridge Industries USA, Inc.Nicola Anthony Pisano · lead counsel
  • π plaintiffCAMBRIDGE INDUSTRIES USA, INC. et al. v. Applied Optoelectronics IncNicola Pisano · Counsel
  • π plaintiffCambridge Industries USA, Inc. v. Applied Optoelectronics, Inc.Nicola Anthony Pisano · lead counsel
  • Δ defendantClean Chemistry, Inc. v. Enviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc.Ann G. Fort · Lead Counsel
  • π plaintiffEnviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc. v. Clean Chemistry, Inc.Cameron C. Murphy · Attorney
  • Δ defendantEnviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc. v. Clean Chemistry, Inc.Ann G. Fort · Lead Counsel
  • Δ defendantUnified Patents Inc. v. Enviro Tech Chemical Services IncAnna C. Halsey · Lead Counsel
  • π plaintiffUntitled caseAnn Grunewald Fort · Attorney for Plaintiff
  • π plaintiffUntitled caseNicola Anthony Pisano · lead counsel
  • Δ defendantUntitled caseNicola Anthony Pisano · Counsel

Further reading

  • AI prior art search tools: a 2026 buyer's guide for defendants

    AI doesn't replace a patent attorney's judgment. It does replace the search step that used to cost $20,000 and take three weeks.

  • How to read a patent claim

    A patent has a 50-page specification, a fancy abstract, and a row of figures. Lawyers and courts look at none of that. They look at the claims.

  • The patent litigation lifecycle

    Most patent cases never reach trial. A defendant who understands the lifecycle makes better decisions about when to fight, when to settle, and when to invest in IPR — instead of overspending on whatever phase they happen to be in.

  • How patent trolls operate (and why the business model works)

    A junk patent generates settlement income exactly the same way as a strong one, because nobody pays $1M to test a $200k demand. The mechanics matter because the failure modes — what makes assertion campaigns expensive or risky for the troll — are exactly where defendants find leverage.

  • Patent reviews: IPR, PGR, and reexamination

    Suing in district court to invalidate a patent costs $3-5M and takes years. The USPTO's post-grant review system does it for $200-500k and 12-18 months. For a defendant facing a weak patent, the choice is usually obvious.

All resources →

Test yourself

How well do you actually know patent law?

Ten multiple-choice questions, about 3 minutes. Covers § 101, § 102, § 103, IPR, claim construction, and the landmark cases. Anonymous, no sign-up. The per-question accuracy data behind the scenes identifies the doctrines defendants get wrong most often — see if you do better than average.

Take the quiz→
IHatePatent Trolls

An open defense for patent defendants. AI-generated invalidity dossiers and a public litigation database — so the next defendant doesn’t have to start from scratch.

HomePatentsLitigationsAssertersCorrespondentsResourcesQuizAboutContactPrivacyAdmin

Not legal advice

All content on this site — including patent summaries, prior-art and obviousness analyses, derivative works, litigation summaries, and any sample response letters — is generated by AI, may contain errors or omissions, and is provided for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing on this site is legal advice and nothing here creates an attorney-client relationship. Do not rely on this content to make legal decisions, respond to demand letters, or take any action in pending or threatened litigation. Consult a licensed patent attorney before acting.

Not every patent holder is a “troll”

Not all companies that litigate their patents are patent trolls. A patent troll — technically a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), sometimes called a Patent Assertion Entity (PAE) — is a person or entity that acquires patents (often broad or vague ones) not to produce goods, but to extort licensing fees or settlements from companies through threats of infringement litigation. Many patent owners enforce their patents legitimately to protect real products, technologies, and research investments they have actually made. The analyses on this site are tools for evaluating any patent assertion on its merits — not blanket accusations against every patentee.

IHatePatentTrolls is a TheDataProject.AI platform. Patent data sourced from public records and user contributions.

© 2026 oconnorventures.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved.