IHatePatent Trolls
Patents
Litigations
Representatives
PTAB
Resources
SearchAdmin
  1. Home
  2. /Representatives
  3. /Radulescu

Counsel registry

Radulescu

8 case appearances — 4 as plaintiff counsel · 4 as defendant counsel.

Attorneys

  • Etai Lahav7
  • David C. Radulescu6
  • Andrew S. Brown5
  • Jonathan Auerbach3
  • David Radulescu2
  • Kevin S. Kudlac1
  • Bryon T. Wasserman1
  • Michael Sadowitz1
  • Andrew Swanson Brown1

Roles

  • lead counsel6
  • back-up counsel6
  • Of Counsel4
  • of counsel4
  • pro hac vice4
  • Lead Counsel1
  • Partner1
  • Special Counsel1

Cases (8)

  • Δ defendantAGS Lighting Management LLC v. Jesco Lighting Group, LLCDavid C. Radulescu · lead counsel
  • π plaintiffElong International USA, Inc. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.David Radulescu · lead counsel
  • Δ defendantElong International USA, Inc. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.David Radulescu · lead counsel
  • Δ defendantFeit Electric Company, Inc. v. Savant Technologies LLC d/b/a GE LightingDavid C. Radulescu · lead counsel
  • π plaintiffJesco Lighting Group v. AGS Lighting Management, LLCDavid C. Radulescu · Lead Counsel
  • π plaintiffSavant Technologies LLC d/b/a GE Lighting et al. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.David C. Radulescu · lead counsel
  • Δ defendantSavant Technologies LLC d/b/a GE Lighting v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.David C. Radulescu · pro hac vice
  • π plaintiffSavant Technologies LLC et al. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.David C. Radulescu · lead counsel

Further reading

  • Patent law glossary

    Sixty-plus patent-law terms, defined in one or two sentences each, with a link to the deeper article. The universal landing pad when an article uses a term you don't know.

  • Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International (2014)

    Bolting 'on a computer' onto an abstract business process doesn't make it patentable. Most software and business-method patents that look like 'doing X on a computer' don't survive when seriously challenged under Alice.

  • Most-litigated US patents: 12 patents that defined the patent troll era

    If a demand letter lands on your desk citing one of these, you are not the first. The campaign playbook is on file. The defenses other defendants used are public record.

  • Patent term and expiration

    Patents don't last forever. They don't even reliably last 20 years. The expiration date that actually matters depends on the earliest filing date, the maintenance schedule, and any USPTO or FDA delays the patent owner can claim back.

  • How to respond to a patent troll demand letter

    Trolls don't write demand letters expecting a fight. The right response makes you the wrong target.

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.