Unknown

I'll start by researching the two named attorneys and the tracked cases, since the firm's name is not populated in the structured data.

I've identified the likely firm. Let me verify with more targeted searches.

Firm Overview

Based on the tracked appearances and attorney research, the firm is Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP (RJLF) — but I want to flag at the outset that the structured case list does not itself name the firm, so this identification is inferred from the two named attorneys. Brian C. Baran is confirmed on the firm's own site as an associate in RJLF's Washington, D.C. office; I could not independently verify an affiliation between Seth L. Eichenholtz and RJLF (note that E.D.N.Y. Magistrate Judge Seth D. Eichenholtz is a different person and should not be conflated).

RJLF is a litigation boutique, not BigLaw. It was founded in October 2018 by Courtland Reichman after his departure from McKool Smith, and describes itself as "a national trial firm" handling high-stakes commercial, IP, and white collar disputes. Headquarters are in Redwood Shores (Silicon Valley), California, with offices in New York, Washington D.C., Austin, and Atlanta — five offices total. On size, sources diverge and both are self-reported: RJLF's Chambers USA 2026 profile lists 50 lawyers, while U.S. News lists 37; treat any figure above ~50 as unsupported. The firm is majority women-owned, operates without billable hours, and is ranked Band 3 for IP: Patent Litigation (California) in Chambers USA 2026, Bronze (litigation) in IAM Patent 1000, and is repeatedly described by Benchmark Litigation and The National Law Journal as an "Elite Boutique"/"Top Trial Boutique."

IP Litigation Specialty

RJLF's IP practice is patent-centric and technology-heavy, spanning cloud storage and data infrastructure (Kove IO), enterprise virtualization software (Cirba/VMware), cellular and networking technology and data-center cooling (Valtrus), foundational video codec technology (VideoLabs), and semiconductor/chip technology. Chambers lists industry sectors including semiconductors, AI, cloud computing, data storage, consumer electronics, and software, with lesser emphasis on pharma/biotech. The firm markets a deep technical bench — over a dozen engineering and science degrees per its own profile. Notably, Benchmark quotes peers describing RJLF's patent docket as "broader industrial spectrum" rather than "beholden to pharma work." The two tracked cases fit squarely: Express Mobile (software/mobile web technology monetization) and In re SAP America (enterprise software patent enforcement, plus a Federal Circuit venue fight).

Side Preference

The tracked data shows 2 plaintiff-side appearances and 0 defense-side, and that is broadly consistent with the firm's public reputation: RJLF built its patent profile on plaintiff-side enforcement and NPE/patent-owner representation — Kove IO, Cirba, Valtrus Innovations, Key Patent Innovations, VideoLabs, and Malikie Innovations are all patent-owner clients. That said, do not read this as a pure plaintiff shop. Benchmark Litigation's 2026 review states peers notice the firm "getting hired for a lot more DEFENSE cases now," and the firm's own profile claims "trial successes for both plaintiffs and defendants." The honest characterization is a patent-owner–leaning firm that is actively building a defense-side book — the 2–0 plaintiff split in the tracked data reflects a small sample, not an exclusive posture.

Notable Cases and Outcomes

• Kove IO v. Amazon Web Services — the firm's signature result and the most consequential public outcome. In April 2024 Reichman and Christine Lehman obtained a $525 million jury verdict (jury found infringement of all three asserted cloud-storage patents); post-trial motions added $148 million in interest, for a $673 million total. Reported as the largest surviving patent verdict of 2024 and among the top 10 of the decade; it contributed to Law360 naming RJLF its 2024 IP Practice Group of the Year.
• Cirba (d/b/a Densify) v. VMware — $84 million willful infringement verdict following a five-day jury trial (May verdict), per Chambers and IAM.
• In re SAP America, Inc., SAP SE (Fed. Cir. No. 2025-118, decided April 10, 2025) — the tracked Federal Circuit matter. RJLF represented respondents Valtrus Innovations Ltd. and Key Patent Innovations Ltd. (Baran on the brief) in opposing SAP's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking intra-district transfer of the E.D. Tex. case from Marshall to Sherman. The petition was denied — a win for the patent owner. Do not confuse this with the separate SAP mandamus challenges (Nos. 25-132/133) over the PTAB's Fintiv guidance rescission, which the Federal Circuit also rejected on November 6, 2025; the public filings there do not show RJLF as counsel.
• Express Mobile, Inc. v. IBM — I could verify the case's existence but not a public verdict, settlement, or dispositive outcome through search, and I could not confirm RJLF as Express Mobile's district-court counsel. Treat this entry as docket-level only.

PTAB / IPR Practice

I found no public report establishing RJLF's IPR/PGR filing volume, so any specific figure would be invented. The directional evidence: the firm's PTAB exposure in the tracked and related matters is predominantly patent-owner side — Valtrus/Key Patent Innovations defending against challenges in the SAP dispute, and the Express Mobile matters sitting inside a large multi-petitioner IPR field (Atlassian, Expedia, Pinterest, Wix and others filed against Express Mobile's patents) that separately produced Federal Circuit mandamus activity. RJLF's own practitioner bios credit Matthew Berkowitz with "post-grant proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office," and the firm's Kove matter included defense of the verdict at the Federal Circuit. Beyond that, treat the IPR practice as credible but not documented at scale.

Key Partners / Practice Leaders

Names reliably sourced from the firm's site, Chambers, IAM, and Benchmark:

• Courtland L. Reichman — founding and managing partner; the firm's marquee IP trial lawyer, ranked Band 3 in Chambers USA for California patent litigation, Law360 2024 IP MVP (one of seven nationally), lead trial counsel in both the Kove and Cirba verdicts.
• Matthew Berkowitz — Silicon Valley partner; Chambers-ranked patent litigator with ITC and PTAB experience; lead counsel for Valtrus in its Hewlett Packard patent enforcement campaign.
• Christine Lehman — managing partner of the D.C. office; the firm's Section 337/ITC leader, ranked by Chambers Global and Chambers USA among the nation's elite ITC litigators; co-tried the Kove verdict.
• Jennifer Estremera — firm managing partner, named in IAM Patent 1000 as a standout for large-scale complex patent cases; Shawna Ballard is likewise named by IAM for patent strategy and trial skill.
• Scott Cole — Austin partner hired February 2025 from McKool Smith/Quinn Emanuel; leads Texas buildout with an emphasis on plaintiff-side NPE work.

Caveats: the firm identification rests on inference from one confirmed attorney (Baran) rather than the structured data itself; attorney counts (37 vs. 50) are self-reported and inconsistent across directories; and the Express Mobile entry could not be corroborated.