Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone

I'll research this firm before drafting.

Let me verify case outcomes and office details.

Patent Litigation Practice Summary — Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP

Firm overview. Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP is a dedicated patent litigation boutique founded in November 2022 by four then-current Paul, Weiss partners: Nicholas Groombridge, Jennifer H. Wu, J. Steven Baughman, and Eric Alan Stone. It maintains three offices — New York (565 Fifth Avenue), Washington, D.C. (801 17th Street NW), and Tokyo (Marunouchi, opened September 2023 under partner Maxwell "Mac" Fox). The firm reported roughly 11 partners and 36 lawyers as of January 2025, up from four founding partners at launch. It is an IP boutique rather than a BigLaw or AmLaw-ranked firm; the relevant external markers are practice rankings, not revenue rankings: Legal 500 U.S. moved it to Tier 3 in Patent Litigation (2025), Benchmark Litigation named it Intellectual Property Firm of the Year in 2024 (and shortlisted it again in 2025), and Chambers USA shortlisted it for IP Firm of the Year. It is not listed among the AmLaw 200, and no reliable public revenue or headcount figure beyond the firm's own statements is available.

IP litigation specialty. The firm's practice is patent litigation end-to-end — district court jury and bench trials, ITC Section 337 actions, arbitrations, PTAB trials, and Federal Circuit appeals — with a stated concentration in life sciences (biologics, pharmaceuticals, medical devices) alongside high-tech matters. Its stated and publicly reported subject-matter coverage includes biotechnology/biologics and BPCIA disputes, small-molecule pharma and Hatch-Waxman work, software, semiconductors and memory, wireless networking, consumer electronics, imaging/geospatial technology, and mechanical/industrial technology. Reporting describes the practice as skewing toward life sciences with a strong trial-centric orientation. The current tracked case list is dominated by technical subject matter — aerial imagery/roof estimation (Nearmap) and medical-device post-grant proceedings (Kurin) — rather than the life sciences work that drives much of the firm's press.

Side preference. The firm is, on the tracked record, a defense-side practice. All five tracked appearances are recorded for defendants, with zero plaintiff-side appearances by the firm itself. Roles in the tracked matters are weighted toward supporting positions (twelve "of counsel," seven "counsel") with a smaller number of lead counsel/lead trial counsel entries. This is consistent with the firm's client base of operating companies — Amgen, Genentech, Garmin, Siemens, Novo Nordisk, Nearmap — defending against NPE or competitor assertions, and it is distinct from the NPE/PAE monetization model. Note, however, that the firm's own materials and Benchmark Litigation describe it as lead counsel for plaintiffs 10x Genomics and Stanford University in single-cell sequencing patent litigation in D. Delaware (paired with defense of the same patents at the PTAB), so the firm is not strictly defense-only; the plaintiff-side engagement simply does not appear in the tracked case set.

Notable matters and outcomes. The most prominent tracked matters are the EagleView/Nearmap disputes. In Eagle View Technologies, Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc. (D. Utah, filed 2021), the firm appears for Nearmap as defendant; Nearmap separately petitioned for IPR on EagleView's U.S. Patents Nos. 8,670,961 and 8,078,436 ("Aerial Roof Estimation Systems and Methods"), the PTAB found the challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, and the Federal Circuit affirmed on February 3, 2026 (Eagle View Techs., Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc., No. 24-1488, nonprecedential). Those wins were partial and mixed: the PTAB denied institution on two other EagleView patents (Nos. 10,671,648 and 9,182,657) in October 2024, and the Director vacated and remanded one final written decision for failure to resolve claim construction and to conduct a full Graham-factor analysis. EagleView announced a global settlement of the Utah litigation on May 29, 2026, with terms confidential. The firm also appears as counsel in Unified Patents v. Kurin, Inc., a PTAB proceeding in which the firm is recorded on the defense/patent-owner side against Unified Patents, a defensive aggregator that files IPRs on behalf of member operating companies (I could not independently verify the specific patent or outcome from available public sources).

Much of the firm's headline trial record predates the firm. Its founders' prior representations — conducted at Paul, Weiss and Weil Gotshal, and listed on the firm's own site — include Edwards Lifesciences' infringement verdict of $394 million against Medtronic (heart valves; related matters settled for roughly $1.1 billion), a $170 million infringement verdict for General Electric against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (wind turbines), Amgen's first-ever BPCIA trial, defense verdicts for Cisco and Garmin, and Liberty Mutual's ten covered-business-method petitions. Those should be attributed to the partners, not to the 2022-founded firm.

PTAB / IPR practice. Post-grant work is a genuine core strength rather than a sideline. World IP Review (2024) reports the firm and its partners have appeared in more than 190 IPRs, PGRs, and CBMs on behalf of both petitioners and patent owners — a figure that necessarily aggregates the partners' pre-2022 practice with work done at the firm. The firm was named Inter Partes Review Firm of the Year at the LMG Life Sciences Americas awards, and partner Megan Raymond was recognized as Post-Grant Attorney of the Year by the same publication. Notable recent PTAB work includes defending Novo Nordisk on Ozempic/Wegovy compound patents, where the firm defeated institution of two IPR challenges in October 2023 and saw a related Mylan/Viatris challenge (IPR2023-00724) resolve by settlement in October 2024. The firm's founders also filed multiple petitions on the PTAB's first day of operation in 2012 and handled the first-ever CBM trial (for SAP).

Practice leaders. Nicholas Groombridge is the firm's most decorated litigator — Chambers Global/USA Band 1 for Intellectual Property: Patent, an IAM Patent 1000 Global Leader, a Lawdragon Legend, past president of the Federal Circuit Bar Association, and reported lead counsel in over 150 district court patent cases with 30+ Federal Circuit arguments. J. Steven Baughman leads the post-grant practice, is an IAM Global Leader, was Law360's first "IP MVP," and has been named PTAB Practitioner of the Year. Jennifer H. Wu is the firm's lead name partner on biologics and life-sciences trial work, a Chambers USA–recognized practitioner (Intellectual Property: Patent, NY) and Federal Circuit Bar Association board member; she also appears most frequently in the tracked case set. Eric Alan Stone (life sciences/biotech) and Megan F. Raymond (post-grant/PTAB) round out the named leadership, with Maxwell Fox heading the Tokyo office.

Sourcing: firm website and press releases; World IP Review USA Patents 2024; Legal 500 US 2025; Benchmark Litigation firm profile and awards; Chambers USA; PTAB filings (USPTO PTACTS); Eagle View Techs., Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc., No. 24-1488 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 3, 2026); U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board institution decisions; EagleView press release (May 29, 2026); American Lawyer (Nov. 21, 2022); Business Wire (Sept. 12, 2023); Asia IP Law / Legal Business Online (Sept. 2023). Partner-level trial results and the 190+ post-grant figure are drawn from firm and directory reporting and reflect partner experience accumulated partly at predecessor firms; the Unified Patents v. Kurin matter could not be independently verified beyond the tracked case data.