Wynne, Smith & Young

I'll verify this firm's profile and the tracked case before drafting.

Important discrepancy emerging — let me dig into the attorney identity and the case docket.

Wynne, Smith & Young, PLLC — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Firm overview. Wynne, Smith & Young, PLLC is a small, general-practice litigation firm headquartered at 707 West Washington Street, Sherman, Texas (Grayson County), with additional offices in McKinney and Dallas. It is not a BigLaw firm or an IP boutique. Martindale-Hubbell lists firm size at 5 attorneys and establishment in 2011, while the firm's own marketing materials have variously described founding in 1986 and "over 18 years" of practice — an inconsistency in the public record worth noting. There is no AmLaw 200, AmLaw 100, or Chambers ranking; the firm's verifiable recognition is regional: Tier 2 in Dallas/Fort Worth for Criminal Defense (General Practice and White-Collar) in the 2026 Best Law Firms edition, plus individual Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers in America listings.

IP litigation specialty. On the public record, the firm does not have a patent litigation practice. Its stated practice areas — criminal defense, personal injury, business and commercial litigation, estate planning and probate, family law, and insurance defense — are consistent across its own site, Martindale, and Lawyers.com. No IP, patent, or trademark practice group is listed, and I found no registered patent attorneys at the firm. The single tracked appearance is ordinary patent infringement defense work, not a specialty practice.

Side preference. The tracked data shows 0 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side appearance (100% defense), with the appearance as Lead Counsel. That sample of one is consistent with the firm's broader defense-oriented litigation profile, but it is far too thin to support any inference about NPE/PAE prosecution work or a systematic defense practice. The firm does not prosecute patents for plaintiffs.

Notable case. The tracked matter is captioned "Capital One v. Wapp Tech Corp." in the supplied data. The underlying district court litigation is Wapp Tech Limited Partnership v. Apple Inc., et al., No. 4:25-cv-00230 (E.D. Tex., Sherman Div., Judge Mazzant), filed March 6, 2025, in which Wapp Tech (a Delaware LP and an Alberta corporation described in the docket record as having no employees, no physical footprint, and no products) accused Apple, Capital One, N.A., Capital One Services, and Frost Bank/Cullen Frost of infringing five patents, with Apple's Xcode platform as the principal accused product. Verifiable developments include a 47-page claim construction opinion (May 1, 2026); denial as moot of the defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motions (Aug. 22, 2025); and a joint notice of settlement with Frost leading the court to deny Frost's motion to dismiss as moot (May 26, 2026). A related case, 3:26-cv-05216 (S.D. Cal.), shows Capital One terminated on June 22, 2026. I could not verify a verdict, Federal Circuit appeal, or settlement attributable to this firm.

PTAB/IPR practice. There is a related PTAB proceeding, IPR2025-01325, Capital One, N.A. et al. v. Wapp Tech Corp. et al., in which the petitioner sought Director Review in December 2025. Nothing in the public record attributes that petition or the Director Review request to Wynne, Smith & Young. I found no PTAB, IPR, or PGR filings by the firm, so there is no IPR practice to describe.

Key partners. Publicly identified partners are Michael C. Wynne (founding partner; board certified in Civil Trial Law and Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization; AV Preeminent; reported 100+ jury trials), John Hunter Smith (criminal defense; board certified; 13 consecutive years on the Texas Super Lawyers list), Ryan Kreck (criminal defense; board certified), and Matthew Maddox (criminal defense, McKinney office). J. Michael Young is the attorney named in the tracked data (recognized in the 2026 Best Lawyers in America for Litigation – Trusts and Estates). None of these attorneys is publicly identified as a patent litigator.

Critical caveat on the tracked appearance. I was unable to substantiate that a Wynne, Smith & Young attorney served as Lead Counsel in this patent matter. Third-party docket aggregators show a "James Michael Young" among counsel on the related S.D. Cal. docket, but that listing associates him with Bailey Cavalieri LLC of Columbus, Ohio — a different lawyer who shares the name, licensed in Ohio in 2010. The name commonly appears on Texas filings as "J. Michael Young" of Sherman. There is a real risk of a name-matching artifact in the underlying data. Any use of this case as a credential for the firm should be independently confirmed against the docket sheets before it is relied upon.