Fee, Smith & Sharp

I'll research this firm before writing.

Now let me verify the tracked patent cases and the specific attorneys.

Patent Litigation Practice Summary — Fee, Smith & Sharp LLP

Firm overview. Fee, Smith & Sharp LLP is a Dallas-headquartered litigation firm founded in 2002, with its principal office at Three Galleria Tower, 13155 Noel Road, Dallas, and additional offices in Austin, Houston, and San Antonio (the Austin and San Antonio addresses are listed in the firm's USLAW network profile; Best Lawyers lists Austin, Dallas, and Houston). U.S. News' firm directory reports roughly 69 lawyers and 26 partners; Martindale-Hubbell lists an AV Preeminent peer rating and dates the firm's establishment to 2002. This is a regional Texas litigation and insurance-defense shop, not a BigLaw firm or an IP boutique. I could not verify any AmLaw 100/200 or Chambers IP ranking; the firm's Best Law Firms recognitions are in Commercial Litigation, Litigation–Insurance, Personal Injury Litigation–Defendants, and Product Liability Litigation–Defendants. The firm previously practiced as Fee, Smith, Sharp & Vitullo.

IP litigation specialty. Intellectual property is a secondary, listed capability rather than a core practice. The firm's own materials (USLAW "IP and Technology"; Martindale; its Super Lawyers firm profile) list intellectual property litigation among a long roster dominated by transportation/trucking liability, construction defect, products and premises liability, insurance coverage, professional liability, and commercial litigation. The two tracked patent matters point to two distinct technology areas: Uniloc-type software activation/licensing patents (Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Electronic Arts, Inc., E.D. Tex.) and Fractus's multiband antenna technology for IoT and fleet telematics. One attorney profile (Eric G. Walraven) also lists trademark litigation and trade-secrets/employment litigation.

Side preference. On the tracked record the firm appears exclusively for patent plaintiffs — 2 of 2 tracked appearances are plaintiff-side, both in an "of counsel" role. Both are matters in which publicly filed dockets show out-of-state or specialized lead counsel (Susman Godfrey LLP and Capshaw DeRieux LLP in Fractus v. Geotab), which is consistent with a local-counsel or appellate-support function rather than first-chair assertion work. That posture is inverse to the firm's overall book of business, which is overwhelmingly defense-side (insurance, tort, products, and transportation defense). The patent work therefore reads as a narrow, plaintiff-side ancillary practice, not a two-sided IP litigation platform.

Notable matters and outcomes. The more significant tracked matter is Fractus, S.A. v. Geotab Inc., No. 2:24-cv-01008 (E.D. Tex.), a four-patent antenna-infringement suit filed December 6, 2024 and consolidated with Fractus v. Verizon Connect (No. 2:24-cv-01009) before Judge Rodney Gilstrap. Geotab filed IPR petitions in 2025 challenging the asserted patents, and the case settled on confidential terms; Fractus publicly announced the Geotab settlement on July 27, 2026 and the Verizon settlement in March 2026 (Fractus press releases; E.D. Tex. dismissal order). The Uniloc v. Electronic Arts matter, No. 6:13-cv-00256 (E.D. Tex., Judge Leonard Davis), was consolidated with Uniloc v. Activision Blizzard and ended with a January 20, 2015 final judgment dismissing all claims, with Uniloc's claims against Activision dismissed with prejudice by stipulation. Note that the well-known Uniloc USA v. Microsoft, 632 F.3d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2011) damages decision involves the same patent family but is a different case in which this firm did not appear.

PTAB / IPR practice. I found no public evidence that Fee, Smith & Sharp maintains a PTAB practice. In the one tracked matter with significant PTAB activity (Fractus v. Geotab), the IPR petitions were filed for Geotab by Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks (e.g., IPR2025-01027 on U.S. Patent 11,349,200), while the patent owner side was led by Susman Godfrey and Capshaw DeRieux. No firm-attributed IPR/PGR filings or institution statistics are publicly reported; any assertion of a PTAB capability here would be unsupported.

Attorneys. Publicly identified firm leadership includes Thomas W. Fee (founding partner; listed USLAW primary contact) and Michael P. Sharp (Senior Partner). Eric G. Walraven is the tracked attorney on the Fractus matter and is admitted before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Fifth Circuit, with a practice emphasizing appellate work — the profile most consistent with a patent appellate role. Brett A. Smith is identified in the case data as the attorney on the Uniloc/Electronic Arts matter; I could not independently verify his current firm bio or his precise role in that case from the firm's website or court records found, so his title and scope of involvement should be treated as unconfirmed. No Fee, Smith & Sharp attorney appears in Chambers, IAM, or Managing IP patent rankings on the sources reviewed.