Gray Reed & McGraw

I'll research the firm's profile and IP litigation practice before drafting.

Let me verify the firm's current name/offices and look into the tracked cases and PTAB activity.

Now let me research the specific tracked cases and the firm's PTAB/IPR footprint.

Gray Reed — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Firm overview. Gray Reed (historically Gray Reed & McGraw LLP, now operating as Gray Reed LLP) is a full-service, Texas-based firm founded in 1985, with three offices — Houston (headquarters, 1300 Post Oak Blvd.), Dallas, and Waco — and roughly 150 lawyers, about 70 of them partners. It is a mid-size regional full-service firm rather than a BigLaw firm or IP boutique: ILRG's 2025 headcount ranking places it at #275 among the 350 largest U.S. firms, and Vault describes it as a "full-service, Texas-based law firm with three offices and 150 attorneys in the Lone Star State." Chambers publishes ranked office profiles for Houston and Dallas but characterizes the firm broadly as full service; I found no Am Law 100/200 placement. Litigation and disputes, corporate/M&A, and energy are generally identified as its deepest practices, with IP as one of 15 organized practice groups.

IP litigation specialty. The firm's IP group handles patent, trademark, copyright, and trade-secret litigation in federal trial and appellate courts, before the USPTO, and at the ITC. Publicly described technical experience skews toward electronics and software rather than pharma or life sciences: partner bios cite standard-essential patents for wireless LTE, video coding/compression, telecommunications and networking, software, electronic design automation, fiber optics, computer displays, and power converters. That matches the tracked docket, which is patent-heavy and electronics/mechanical in character — vehicle-tracking and telematics patents in Orthosie Systems and RFC Lenders of Texas v. CalAmp, and firearms-component patents in the Rare Breed Triggers litigation. The firm's Dallas-based IP group was built out through lateral hiring in 2016 (Tautfest, Hoggan, Bindler, DeZern).

Side preference. Gray Reed works both sides, and the tracked appearances split evenly: two plaintiff-side and two defendant-side matters. The firm's own description states its patent litigators "guide both plaintiffs and defendants through every stage," and IP department chair Eric S. Tautfest's bio notes he began his career working "exclusively on the plaintiff's side" of patent monetization and enforcement before carrying that approach into defense work and settlement-counsel engagements. The plaintiff-side tracked matters (Orthosie Systems, RFC Lenders) are patent-owner enforcement actions, while the defendant-side work is defense of accused products in a consolidated patent MDL — consistent with a practice that monetizes portfolios for some clients and defends operating companies for others.

Notable tracked cases and outcomes. Orthosie Systems, LLC v. IMETRIK, Inc. — plaintiff-side patent enforcement, with Eric M. Tautfest listed as lead counsel. (Note: the case list renders the attorney as "Eric M. Tautfest" while the firm website identifies the IP department chair as Eric S. Tautfest; the records appear to refer to the same partner, but the middle initial differs.) Rare Breed Triggers Inc. et al. v. Damion Terrell Bennett et al. and v. Thomas Carter II et al. — Gray Reed represents accused defendants (including Hanes Tactical/Bennett) in what has become In re Rare Breed Triggers Patent Litigation, MDL No. 3176, consolidated in the E.D. Tex. before Chief Judge Amos Mazzant; as of the most recent docket entries I reviewed, a consolidated preliminary-injunction motion is set for hearing January 11, 2027, and defendants have moved to stay preliminary-injunction proceedings pending Federal Circuit appeals. RFC Lenders of Texas, LLC v. CalAmp Corp. — plaintiff-side matter with Tautfest as local counsel; I was unable to verify a public outcome. Separately, the firm's own press materials publicize its role in securing a jury verdict of infringement, willfulness, no invalidity, and over $10 million in damages for PanOptis against Huawei (2018), and partner bios describe a $95 million jury verdict plus permanent injunction for a power-converter manufacturer that was affirmed by the Federal Circuit with certiorari denied (client/case not named). These are firm-published descriptions; I did not independently verify the firm's specific role in each.

PTAB / IPR practice. The firm's IP practice description covers work before the USPTO, and its patent litigators are registered to practice before the Office, but I found no public reporting or firm publication quantifying an IPR/PGR filing or defense practice (e.g., petition counts, PTAB rankings). Treat any characterization of its PTAB volume as unverified pending a dedicated search of PTAB docket data.

Key IP litigation personnel. Eric S. Tautfest (chair, Intellectual Property Department; patent monetization/enforcement and settlement counsel) and David T. DeZern (patent litigation; Best Lawyers in America, Patent Litigation) are the most prominently sourced IP litigators, with Jared Hoggan (patent litigation; former Federal Circuit clerk to Judge Kimberly Moore) and Jill Bindler (patent and complex commercial litigation) also identified in firm announcements. On the defense side of the Rare Breed MDL, Michael A. Chibib is listed as lead counsel and David R. D'Angelo as counsel.

Sourcing caveats. Firm size, office footprint, and attorney counts are from the firm site, Vault, ILRG, and Chambers; technology specialties and prior results are from firm attorney bios and press releases (self-reported). No reliable public source I reviewed supports a specific PTAB/IPR volume figure or an Am Law 100/200 ranking for this firm.