Counsel registry

Slater Matsil

3 case appearances — 3 as plaintiff counsel · 0 as defendant counsel.

Attorneys

Further reading

How patent trolls operate (and why the business model works)
A junk patent generates settlement income exactly the same way as a strong one, because nobody pays $1M to test a $200k demand. The mechanics matter because the failure modes — what makes assertion campaigns expensive or risky for the troll — are exactly where defendants find leverage.
Prior art and § 102 novelty
Most issued patents have anticipating prior art that the examiner missed. The work is finding it and proving the date.
What to do if you get a patent demand letter
A patent demand letter is a request for money, not a court order. The plaintiff's leverage is your fear; preparation removes it.
Bilski v. Kappos (2010)
Machine-or-transformation isn't the only § 101 test, business-method patents survived as a category, and the specific Bilski hedging method was unpatentable. The trio of Bilski, Mayo, and Alice gave defendants the modern § 101 motion.
Cost of Inter Partes Review (IPR): a 2026 breakdown
An IPR ends most cases when the prior art is real. The all-in cost is roughly a tenth of full litigation — but only if you stage it right.