Wolf, Greenfield & Sorkin

I'll research the firm before writing.

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Firm overview. Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. ("Wolf Greenfield") is a Boston-headquartered intellectual property boutique founded in 1927, with additional offices in New York and Washington, D.C. It describes itself — and is described by Chambers — as one of the ten largest U.S. firms devoted exclusively to IP, with over 150 legal professionals (Chambers USA 2026 firm profile); the firm's own materials cite more than 160 legal professionals and note that over 90% of practitioners hold science or engineering degrees. It is best characterized as a nationally recognized IP boutique rather than a BigLaw general-practice firm, and I could not verify an AmLaw 100/200 ranking for it. Chambers USA ranks it Band 2 for Intellectual Property in Massachusetts and Band 3 nationwide for Patent Trial and Appeal Board work, with additional recognition in Legal 500 (patents prosecution/post-grant; ITC litigation) and IAM Patent 1000.

IP litigation specialty. The litigation practice is centered on electronics, computer systems, semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing, software/internet technology, medical devices, and — through a deep life sciences bench — pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Publicly reported matters include ITC work for Lenovo (prevailing in the Ericsson v. Google/Lenovo investigation), Infineon Technologies' semiconductor disputes against Innoscience spanning the ITC, PTAB, and district court, ITC representations for Sony, and litigation for medical device and 3D-printing clients (e.g., Formlabs in 3D Systems v. Formlabs; Straumann; Solarflare). Firm rankings consistently highlight the firm's technical depth across electrical/computer technologies, mechanical technologies, and life sciences.

Side preference. The tracked appearance data here shows a single matter, on the defense side, as lead counsel: IoT Innovations LLC v. Savant Systems, Inc. (0 plaintiff / 1 defendant). Considered alongside the broader public record, the firm's litigation docket is defense-leaning in the NPE/PAE context — its litigation page touts three separate successful defenses for client Geotab against non-practicing entities (including a Delaware suit by Inventergy LBS dropped after Wolf Greenfield signaled IPR and validity challenges) — while also asserting patents for operating companies such as Keurig (against Kraft and others), Diomed, Sunrise Technologies, and LiTL LLC (in LiTL LLC v. Dell Technologies, D. Del. 2023). On the available evidence, this is a both-sides practice skewed toward defending technology and life-sciences operating companies, not a firm that prosecutes NPE campaigns.

Notable tracked case and outcomes. The one tracked matter is IoT Innovations LLC v. Savant Systems, Inc., a smart-home/IoT patent dispute in the District of Massachusetts in which IoT Innovations (identified publicly as an Empire IP-linked NPE) asserted numerous patents concerning network data classification, wireless device-server pairing, and related smart-home functionality against Savant. The tracked record lists Michael A. Albert as lead counsel with Justin Colannino, Jason H. Liss, and Richard F. Giunta. Sourcing caveat: the publicly indexed dockets for the consolidated D. Mass. case (No. 1:23-cv-12528; No. 1:24-cv-11057) show Michael E. Attaya and, per Jones Day's own experience page, Jones Day handling Savant's defense, and the case reportedly settled after court-ordered mediation; the Wolf Greenfield appearance likely relates to one of the four originally filed suits or an earlier phase of the dispute, and I could not independently confirm the firm's role from primary court records. Separately, well-documented firm results include a roughly $17 million settlement for Keurig from Kraft on the eve of trial, what the firm describes as Massachusetts' largest jury verdict of 2007 for Diomed in a laser vein-treatment patent case, and a Federal Circuit-affirmed multi-million-dollar biotech jury award.

PTAB / IPR practice and practice leaders. Wolf Greenfield maintains a dedicated Post-Grant Proceedings practice chaired by Elisabeth Hunt, with Richard F. Giunta and Scott McKeown among its recognized PTAB specialists; both patentee-side and challenger-side work is performed. Chambers USA 2026 ranks the firm in Band 3 nationwide for PTAB practice (the firm publicizes this as a top-15 national ranking), and Legal 500 lists it among the top 10 U.S. firms for patents prosecution including reexamination and post-grant proceedings. Reported work includes challenging seven Immersion patents with institution secured in all seven, and a PTAB post-grant review win for Inari Agriculture on Section 112 grounds. No public filing-volume figure (e.g., annual IPR petition counts) is reliably sourced, so scale should be described only qualitatively. Key litigation names: Michael A. Albert (litigation chair for over 15 years; lead counsel on the tracked Savant matter), Gregory Corbett (current Litigation practice chair, first-chair trial and ITC experience), Richard F. Giunta (PTAB/post-grant), and Elisabeth Hunt (post-grant proceedings chair).