Patrick J. McKeever

Partner

Patrick J. McKeever

San Diego

Print bio

858.720.5700 direct

PMcKeever@perkinscoie.com

Notice

Before proceeding, please note: If you are not a current client of Perkins Coie, please do not include any information in this e-mail that you or someone else considers to be of a confidential or secret nature. Perkins Coie has no duty to keep confidential any of the information you provide. Neither the transmission nor receipt of your information is considered a request for legal advice, securing or retaining a lawyer. An attorney-client relationship with Perkins Coie or any lawyer at Perkins Coie is not established until and unless Perkins Coie agrees to such a relationship as memorialized in a separate writing.

vCard

Patrick handles complex patent disputes in district courts around the country and before the U.S. Patent Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Patrick McKeever represents clients ranging from emerging companies to Fortune 500 corporations. He has substantial experience litigating Section 337 investigations through trial at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Patrick’s deep understanding of technology informs his winning dispute-resolution strategies. A former software developer and technical project manager, he earned a computer science degree and has significant technical knowledge in software and computer-related technologies. Clients have called upon him to litigate patents dealing with operating systems, mobile applications, web applications, streaming video, networking, e-commerce, mapping software, smartphones, electronics, digital photography, and mechanical devices.

Patrick has litigated more than 20 post-grant proceedings, including both inter partes review and Covered Business Method review proceedings. He also has significant experience in all aspects of post-grant practice, from drafting petitions to arguing oral hearings. Patrick has succeeded in invalidating patents in post-grant proceedings and in cases with preliminary wins at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that have led to favorable settlements of related litigation for his clients.

Areas of focus

Industries

Communications

Services

Patent Litigation

Patent Prosecution & Portfolio Counseling

ITC Litigation

Post-Grant Proceedings

Intellectual Property Law

Trademark, Copyright, Internet & Advertising

Education & Credentials

Education

UCLA School of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif, Editor-in-Chief, Senior Articles Editor, UCLA Journal of Law & Technology, 2009
University of Notre Dame, B.S., Computer Science, cum laude, 2002

Bar and Court Admissions

California
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Related Employment

Fish & Richardson P.C., San Diego, CA, Summer Associate, 2008
Hogan & Hartson LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Summer Associate, 2007, 2008
LifeScan Inc., a Johnson & Johnson Company, Milpitas, CA, Senior Analyst, 2004-2006
Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, Information Management Leadership Development Program, 2002-2004

Professional Recognition

Recognized as a “40 Under 40” by the San Diego Daily Transcript, 2018

Professional Experience

District Court and ITC Litigation

Koninklijke Philips N.V. et al. v. Acer Inc. et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Representing Microsoft as intervenor in pending patent litigations before Judge Sleet relating to tablet and smartphone technology.

Ameranth, Inc. v. Starbucks Corp.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
Representing Starbucks in pending patent litigation before Judge Sabraw related to mobile payment and mobile ordering.

Bradium Technologies LLC v. Microsoft Corporation

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Act as counsel for Microsoft in patent case before Judge Andrews related to mapping software. Case settled favorably following wins in inter partes review proceedings.

Luminara Worldwide, LLC, et al. v. Liown Electronics Co. Ltd.

U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Represented defendant and counterclaim-plaintiff Liown in a six-patent competitor case before Judge Nelson dealing with LED candles. Case settled favorably following a series of wins in inter partes review proceedings.

TransVideo Electronics, Ltd. v. Hulu, LLC

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represented Hulu in patent litigation before Judge Stark related to video distribution systems. Obtained early claim construction victory, which led to voluntary dismissal of case.

TransVideo Electronics, Ltd. v. Netflix, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represented Netflix in patent litigation before Judge Stark related to video distribution systems. Obtained early claim construction victory, which led to voluntary dismissal of case.

Convergent Media Solutions LLC v. Hulu, LLC

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Served on the counsel team for Hulu in a five-patent case before Judge Lynn related to second-screen mobile app functionality. Case settled favorably following institution of inter partes review proceedings on all patents-in-suit.

Convergent Media Solutions LLC v. Netflix, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Served as counsel for Netflix in a five-patent case before Judge Lynn related to second-screen mobile app functionality. Case settled favorably following institution of inter partes review proceedings on all patents-in-suit.

Convergent Media Solutions LLC v. Roku, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Served as counsel for Roku in a two-patent case before Judge Lynn related to second screen mobile app functionality. Case settled favorably following institution of inter partes review proceedings on all patents-in-suit.

In the Matter of Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, U.S. International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-726

U.S. International Trade Commission
Acted as counsel for Respondents HTC Corporation and HTC America Inc. in a three-patent case investigation before CALJ Luckern concerning camera functionality in smartphones; win at trial and initial ID finding non-infringement, invalidity based on-sale bar, and none of the domestic industry licensees practiced the asserted patents; Commission reviewed the ID, affirmed the findings on petition and also found HTC had an implied license to practice the asserted patents for its Windows-based products. Other respondents Nokia and RIM settled shortly before trial and LG settled after trial and before the initial determination; Summary Affirmance at the Federal Circuit.

In the Matter of Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, U.S. International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-850

Acted as counsel for Respondents HTC Corporation and HTC America Inc. in a four-patent investigation before ALJ Essex concerning camera functionality, messaging and image processing systems in smartphones; prior to the hearing, one patent was dismissed; obtained final determination finding non-infringement, and none of the domestic industry licensees practiced two of the remaining three asserted patents. Complainant FlashPoint Technology, Inc. did not appeal the final determination.

Flashpoint Technology Inc. v. HTC Corporation, et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represented HTC in patent litigation concerning 10 patents related to mobile technologies.

In re Certain Point-To Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-892

Counsel for Netflix and AmTRAN in patent litigation before ALJ Shaw brought by a patent assertion entity against accused smart TVs, Blu-ray players, tablets and the Netflix software used to stream video content on those devices. Just prior to trial, patent owner Straight Path IP Group, Inc. withdrew its complaint.

LBS Innovations LLC v. BP America Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Acted as counsel for declaratory judgment plaintiff Microsoft and various defendants, including Starbucks, Target, Costco and U.S. Bank in patent litigation before Judge Gilstrap related to online store locators. Case settled after favorable claim construction order.

LBS Innovations, LLC v. Sally Beauty Supply LLC, et al

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Counsel for Sally Beauty Supply in patent litigation before Judge Gilstrap related to online store locators. Case settled after favorable claim construction order.

LBS Innovations, LLC v. Aaron Brothers, Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Counsel for Adams Golf in patent litigation related to online store locators. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed case shortly before trial.

Apple Inc. v. High Tech Computer (HTC) Corporation

International Trade Commission
U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Defended HTC in actions in the International Trade Commission (ITC) and district court alleging infringement of 20 patents relating to operating systems and mobile handsets.

Microsoft Corp. et al v. GeoTag, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represented declaratory judgment plaintiff Microsoft in patent litigation related to geo-targeted advertising. Parties stipulated to dismissal following order granting summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of co-plaintiff.

Smartflash LLC v. HTC Corporation and HTC America Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Served as counsel for HTC in patent litigation concerning content delivery and payment systems. Patents were invalidated by co-defendants in post-grant proceedings prior to trial.

Tierravision Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
Representing Microsoft in patent litigation related to mobile mapping functionality. Case stayed pending inter partes reexamination filed by co-defendant.

Transcenic Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
Represented Microsoft in patent litigation related to mobile mapping functionality.

Personal Audio, LLC v. HTC Corporation and HTC America Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Acted as counsel for HTC in a two patent case before Judge Clark concerning audio playlist functionality. Settled favorably.

Lodsys, LLC v. Hulu LLC

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Acted as counsel for Hulu in patent litigation related to online reviews.

ATEN International Company, Ltd. v. Belkin Corporation

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Acted as counsel for ATEN in patent litigation related to KVM switches.

Post-Grant Proceedings

Starbucks Corporation v. Ameranth Inc., CBM2015-00091, CBM2015-00099

Acted as counsel for Petitioner in Covered Business Method review proceedings challenging two patents related to menu generation and data synchronization. Obtained final written decision invalidating all instituted claims based on obviousness. Patent owner declined to appeal.

Agilysys, Inc. et al. v. Ameranth Inc., CBM2014-00015, CBM2014-00016

Served as counsel for Petitioner Starbucks in Covered Business Method review proceedings challenging two patents related to menu generation and data synchronization. Obtained final written decision invalidating claims based on Section 101. Decision affirmed by the Federal Circuit on appeal.

Shenzhen Liown Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Disney Enterprises, Inc., IPR2015-01658, IPR2015-01656, IPR2015-01657, IPR2016-01785, IPR2016-01834, IPR2016-01835

Acted as counsel for Petitioner Liown in inter partes review proceedings challenging five patents related to LED candles. Obtained final written decision invalidating all instituted claims in the first three cases. Following institution, three additional cases were voluntarily dismissed pursuant to settlement.

Microsoft Corporation v. Bradium Technologies, LLC
IPR2015-00448, IPR2015-00449, IPR2016-01897, IPR2017-01616, IPR2017-01817, IPR2017-01818

Acting as counsel for petitioner in inter partes review proceedings challenging six patents related to mapping software. Obtained a final written decision in two cases invalidating all instituted claims. Additional cases were voluntarily dismissed pursuant to settlement.

Netflix, Inc. v. Convergent Media Solutions, LLC,
IPR2016-01811, IPR2016-01812, IPR2016-01813, IPR2016-01814

Represented petitioners in inter partes review proceedings challenging six patents related to second- screen mobile app functionality. Following institution, cases were voluntarily dismissed pursuant to settlement.