Haltom & Doan

I'll research the firm before writing the summary.

Let me gather more on specific outcomes and PTAB activity.

Haltom & Doan — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Firm overview. Haltom & Doan is a litigation boutique founded in 2004 and headquartered in Texarkana, Texas, with additional Texas offices in Marshall, Tyler, and Plano (Best Lawyers firm profile; Martindale lists a seven-lawyer Texarkana office). The firm describes itself as "a diverse boutique of professionals" practicing exclusively in civil trial and appellate matters in Texas and Arkansas state and federal courts, building on "more than 150 years of courtroom experience." It is not BigLaw and does not appear in the AmLaw 100/200; its footprint and headcount place it firmly in the regional trial-boutique category. Its principal third-party ranking is Chambers USA, which places the firm in Band 6 for Intellectual Property – Texas in the 2026 USA Guide, and it holds Best Law Firms/Best Lawyers rankings in Litigation – Intellectual Property and Litigation – Patent.

IP litigation specialty. The firm's patent work is concentrated in Eastern District of Texas defense, with technology areas including networking and Ethernet/Power-over-Ethernet (Network-1 v. HPE), web-browser and interactive-web software (Eolas), Wi-Fi and standards-essential wireless patents (Atlas Global Technologies v. TP-Link), consumer-electronics and media/DRM patents (Personalized Media Communications v. Netflix), semiconductors (Excelliance MOS v. Force MOS), and retail-analytics/software patents (Alpha Modus). Beyond IP, its practice blends pharmaceutical/medical-device, products liability, environmental/toxic tort, antitrust, and complex business litigation — a general commercial trial shop rather than a dedicated patent firm (firm site; Chambers; Martindale).

Side preference. The tracked docket skews heavily to the defense: 14 defendant-side appearances versus 4 plaintiff-side. The roles are dominated by local-counsel engagements (16 entries labeled "Local Counsel," 10 "local counsel"), with a smaller number of "Counsel" or "Of Counsel" entries and one lead-counsel entry. In practice, that means Haltom & Doan is used most often as Texas trial/local counsel for operating companies (Hewlett Packard Enterprise and HP Inc. recur repeatedly, alongside Netflix, TP-Link, Force MOS, and Amazon/Yahoo! in earlier matters) rather than as a nationwide NPE-side filer. Caveat: four tracked entries (Alpha Modus, Velocity Communication Technologies) are coded plaintiff-side, but at least one Velocity matter is coded both plaintiff and defendant across entries, so those designations should be treated as data uncertainty rather than a verified plaintiff practice.

Notable cases and outcomes. The two most prominent public results are patent defense wins. In Eolas Technologies v. Adobe, Amazon, Yahoo!, Google, et al. (E.D. Tex., No. 6:09-cv-446), Jennifer Haltom Doan served as co-lead counsel for Amazon and Yahoo! in a bifurcated invalidity trial; the jury found the asserted claims of the '906 and '985 patents invalid (Feb. 9, 2012), and final judgment entered for defendants, with costs taxed against Eolas. In Network-1 Technologies, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co. (E.D. Tex., No. 6:13-cv-72), Doan was HPE's lead attorney on a three-firm trial team (with Bartlit Beck and McDermott Will & Emery); after a six-day trial the jury found no infringement and invalidity of all six asserted claims of U.S. Patent 6,218,930 — a defense verdict against a plaintiff that had licensed the patent to 27 vendors and reportedly generated over $116 million in royalties; the case drew a Litigator of the Week award from The American Lawyer (2017) and survived Network-1's post-trial motions and Federal Circuit appeal. The firm also reports defense verdicts for clients in other patent matters and dismissals for lack of standing and § 101 patentable-subject-matter failures (lawyers.com profile; Law360; Bartlit Beck case study; court records).

PTAB / IPR practice. There is no well-sourced evidence of a standalone Haltom & Doan IPR/PGR filing practice. The firm's public record shows IPR activity only indirectly: HP was a co-petitioner in the PTAB challenges to the Network-1 '930 patent (litigated largely by other firms), and the trial turned in part on AIA estoppel from those proceedings. The firm's IP work is best characterized as district-court trial and local-counsel defense, with PTAB proceedings handled by national co-counsel. Any claim of a significant independent PTAB filing volume would not be supportable on the available record.

Key partners / practice leaders. Jennifer Haltom Doan, founding partner, is the firm's primary IP litigation figure — double board certified in Civil Trial Law and Personal Injury Trial Law, past chair of the IADC Intellectual Property Committee, a frequent EDTX and FTSC lecturer, and Chambers-recognized in Texas IP. Joshua R. Thane is a partner recognized by Chambers for IP litigation (Up & Coming) and by Best Lawyers in Litigation – Patent and Litigation – Intellectual Property. Darby V. Doan, partner (Texarkana and Marshall), handles IP and commercial litigation and is a licensed CPA. Kyle R. Akin is a firm attorney who worked on the Network-1 and Eolas trial teams.