Counsel registry
Scheef & Stone
27 case appearances — 13 as plaintiff counsel · 14 as defendant counsel.
Firm overview
Scheef & Stone, L.L.P. is a full-service business law firm with offices in Dallas, Frisco, and Marshall, Texas. As of 2022, the firm comprises over 60 attorneys, many of whom joined from larger national firms, emphasizing high-quality representation in a more personal and efficient setting. While not a BigLaw firm, Scheef & Stone was recognized in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms, achieving a Tier 3 metropolitan ranking in Litigation – Intellectual Property for Dallas. The firm is also a member of Mackrell International, a global legal network that received a Band 1 ranking in the Chambers and Partners Global Guide for 2026.
The firm's intellectual property litigation practice spans a diverse range of technologies, including display technology, integrated circuits, wireless communications, automotive systems, networking, and software. Their attorneys handle the evaluation, acquisition, development, and protection of technology and intellectual property rights across various industries. Specific areas of experience include chemical engineering, energy, medical devices, AI-related technologies, internet software, and oilfield and construction-related intellectual property matters.
Scheef & Stone actively represents both plaintiffs and defendants in patent disputes, with an almost even split of 13 plaintiff-side and 14 defendant-side appearances among its tracked cases. Many engagements involve serving as local counsel. Notable plaintiff-side representation includes General Video LLC v. Hewlett-Packard (HP), a patent infringement dispute concerning display technology patents, which concluded in January 2026 with a joint dismissal with prejudice and each party bearing its own fees, indicating a negotiated resolution. The firm also represented Valtrus Innovations Ltd. in a patent infringement case against NetApp, Inc., filed in the Eastern District of Texas.
The firm also maintains a practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with Michael Charles Smith appearing in at least two Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, IPR2020-01266 (in both plaintiff and defendant roles) and IPR2022-00135 (in a defendant role).
Key partners in the intellectual property litigation practice include Michael C. Smith, a partner in the Marshall office who has appeared as counsel of record in over 900 civil cases in the Eastern District of Texas, specializing in complex commercial and patent litigation. Mr. Smith was named an Intellectual Property Trailblazer by the National Law Journal and is recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® for Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, and Patent Law. Other prominent practitioners include Mark Nielsen, an equity partner focusing on patent, trademark, and copyright disputes, and Tom Kulik, a technology lawyer with a background in computer systems engineering who handles IT transactions, software licensing, cybersecurity, and IP/technology litigation. John Fischer, a registered U.S. Patent Attorney, brings extensive experience in patent defense litigation, particularly in industrial and materials-related patents.
Attorneys
Roles
- local counsel13
- Local Counsel8
- Local Counsel/Lead Counsel1
- Local counsel1
- Counsel1
- counsel of record, local counsel1
- Of Counsel, Local Counsel1
Cases (27)
- Δ defendant23-2443Michael Charles Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantAdvanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC v. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company LtdMichael C. Smith · local counsel
- π plaintiffAdvanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC v. United Microelectronics CorporationMichael C. Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantAdvanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC v. Unknown DefendantMichael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- Δ defendantAml Ip LLC v. Kingsisle Entertainment, Inc.Michael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- Δ defendantAutoConnect Holdings LLC v. Ford Motor CompanyMichael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- π plaintiffBishop Display Tech LLC v. TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. et al.Michael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- Δ defendantBright Data, Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB et al.Michael Charles Smith · local counsel
- π plaintiffCobblestone Wireless LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.Michael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- Δ defendantEmerging Automotive LLC v. Toyota Motor North America, Inc. et al.Michael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- π plaintiffGeneral Video LLC v. Hewlett-Packard (HP)Michael C. Smith · Local Counsel/Lead Counsel
- π plaintiffInnovative Display Technologies LLC v. Canon U.S.A. Inc.Michael C. Smith · local counsel
- π plaintiffIPR2020-01266Michael Charles Smith
- Δ defendantIPR2020-01266Michael Charles Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantIPR2022-00135Michael Charles Smith
- π plaintiffK. Mizra LLC v. Rapid7, Inc.Michael Charles Smith · local counsel
- π plaintiffPaneltouch Technologies LLC v. BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.Michael C. Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantSampo IP, LLC v. E*Trade Financial Corporate Services Inc.Michael C. Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantUnified Patents v. Ginko LLCMichael Charles Smith · Counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMichael C. Smith · Local Counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMichael C. Smith · Local counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMichael C. Smith · counsel of record, local counsel
- π plaintiffUntitled caseMichael C. Smith · Of Counsel, Local Counsel
- Δ defendantUntitled caseMichael Charles Smith · Local Counsel
- π plaintiffValtrus Innovations Ltd. et al. v. NetApp, Inc.Michael C. Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantVirtamove Corp. v. International Business Machines Corp. et al.Michael C. Smith · local counsel
- Δ defendantWapp Tech Limited Partnership et al. v. Bank of America CorporationMichael C. Smith · local counsel