Gregory F. Corbett

Overview

Greg Corbett is the Chair of Wolf Greenfield’s Litigation Practice and a Shareholder in the firm’s Litigation and Post-Grant Proceedings Practices with 25 years of experience, including as lead litigation counsel representing clients in all stages of complex intellectual property and patent litigation, post-grant proceedings, appellate proceedings, licensing, and client counseling.

Greg is a first-chair litigator with extensive experience litigating in multiple jurisdictions, including the District of Delaware, the International Trade Commission (ITC), the Western, Eastern, and Northern Districts of Texas, the Eastern District of Virginia, the Northern, Central, and Southern Districts of California, the Northern District of Illinois, the District of Columbia, and the District of Massachusetts.

Greg has also been actively involved in multiple inter partes review (IPR) and other post-grant proceedings before the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Greg also has extensive appellate experience, including as lead appellate counsel, and has been involved in more than 15 appeals before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the US Supreme Court.

Greg has experience representing clients in cases involving a wide range of technologies, and in particular, his practice has focused on electronics, computer systems, software, smartphone, semiconductor and semiconductor manufacturing technology, microcontrollers, and internet technology. He also has extensive experience involving chemical products and processes, as well as pharmaceuticals, biotech, and medical device matters.

Greg has been to trial many times, including as lead counsel in four recent trials before the ITC (multi-patent investigations involving computer system technologies), a successful jury trial in the District of Delaware, and successful trials in the Eastern District of Virginia and the Northern District of California.

As lead counsel, Greg has handled opening statements and closing arguments, examined primary expert and corporate witnesses before juries, has successfully argued summary judgment and dispositive motions, and has successfully argued at Markman hearings.

Prior to joining Wolf Greenfield, Greg was a partner at an Am Law 10 law firm, where he had more than 10 years of patent and IP litigation experience.

Prior to that, he clerked for the Honorable Arthur J. Gajarsa in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Honorable Edward F. Harrington in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

While in law school, Greg was the Executive Editor of the Boston College Law Review.

Experience

• Persuaded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to (a) construe key claim terms favorably for potential non-infringement arguments in concurrent litigation and (b) cancel all claims asserted by Patent Owner's licensee against our client Infineon's customers.  Leveraged IPR petitions to negotiate early pre-institution stays in concurrent litigations.  Patent Owner dismissed appeals of the final IPR decisions with prejudice.
• AGIS v. Google (ITC and E.D. Texas) (2022-2023): Represented Google as lead partner in complex, four-patent complex ITC investigation related to location-sharing functionality used in smartphone technology. Served as lead respondent in large multi-respondent JDG and obtained successful result for the ITC investigation with complainant withdrawing complaint.
• SPS v. Perfect Plastic Printing / Infineon Technologies (D. Delaware and PTAB) (2021-present). Defending Infineon and others in four-patent infringement action involving RFID smartcard chip technology. Pending.
• Infineon v. Amatech (PTAB) (2022-present): Represent Infineon in four IPR matters involving RFID technology, and obtained favorable FWDs invalidating all asserted patent claims.
• Arigna v. Google (ITC and W.D. Texas) (2021-2022): Represented Google as lead partner in multi-patent ITC investigation related to power-semiconductor technology, including as used in smartphones. Investigation successfully resolved prior to hearing.
• Amphenol v. Luxshare (ITC and N.D. California) (2020-2022): Represented Amphenol as lead partner in complex, five-patent, competitor ITC investigation related to electrical connectors and computer system technology. Prevailed in obtaining both an exclusion order and a cease and desist order.
• Ocean Semiconductor v. Infineon et al. (D. Massachusetts) (2020-2022). Defended Infineon as lead litigation partner in eight-patent infringement case related to semiconductor manufacturing products and processes. Matter settled after successfully staying case pending IPRs.
• Fitbit / Google v. Philips (D. Massachusetts) (2020-present). Represent Fitbit/Google as Massachusetts counsel in multiple ongoing matters.
• Neodron v. Sony (ITC and PTAB) (2019-2021): Defended Sony as lead litigation partner in ITC investigation involving multiple patents related to smartphone and computer touch-screen controllers. Investigation settled successfully prior to trial.
• Google v. HDI (2020-2021) (PTAB).  Represented Google in multiple IPR matters involving CAPTCHA technology. Matters settled successfully.
• Newflux v. Best Buy et al. (Google) (W.D. Texas) (2020-2021). Defended Best Buy (as Google customer) in patent infringement action involving certain tablet input technology. Matter settled successfully.
• Google/LGE/Samsung v. Boccone (2020-2021) (PTAB). Represented Google, LGE, and Samsung in multiple IPR matters involving image searching and GUI technologies.  Matters settled successfully.
• Google/LGE/Samsung v. Zipit (2019-2021) (PTAB). Represented Google, LGE, and Samsung in multiple IPR matters involving messaging techniques.  Matters settled successfully.
• Google/LGE/Samsung v. AGNC (2018-2020) (PTAB). Represented Google, LGE, and Samsung in multiple IPR matters involving global positioning technology.  Matters settled successfully.
• Fujifilm v. Sony (ITC and PTAB) (2017-2019): Represented Sony as lead litigation partner in multi-patent ITC investigation involving computer system technology.  First chair at trial, successfully examined key corporate and expert witnesses, and matter settled successfully thereafter.
• Exegy v. ACTIV Financial Systems (N.D. Illinois and PTAB) (2019-2021). Defended client in 11-patent case involving computer programmable logic technology.  Succeeded in staying matter pending IPRs; settled successfully.
• Corydoras v. Best Buy et al. (Google) (E.D. Texas) (2019-2020).  Defended Best Buy (as Google customer) in patent infringement action involving certain smartphone technology. Matter settled successfully.
• Viatech v. Adobe (D. Massachusetts) (2019-2020). Represented Adobe as Massachusetts counsel in patent infringement action, succeeded in transferring matter to Delaware.
• Blue Sky Networks v. MediaTek (W.D. Texas) (2017-2018). Defended MediaTek in eight-patent infringement case involving certain smartphone and Bluetooth network technology.  Matter settled successfully.
• D’Alise v. Straumann (2017-2018) (n.D. Tex.): Defended Straumann in patent infringement action involving dental component technology. Settled favorably.
• Fujifilm v. Sony (ITC, CBP, CAFC, and PTAB) (2016—2018): Represented Sony as lead litigation partner in multi-patent ITC investigation involving computer system technology.  First-chair at trial.  Matter involved substantial parallel experience in proceedings before Customs, Enforcement proceeding before the ITC, and Federal Circuit Appellate proceedings.
• Zircore v. Straumann (2015-2017) (E.D. Texas and PTAB): Represented Straumann as lead litigation partner in patent infringement action involving software and dental component technology. Argued at Markman, and matter settled favorably thereafter.
• Solarflare v. Exablaze (2016-2017) (D.N.J.): Represented Solarflare as lead litigation counsel in multi-patent infringement action involving network interface technology.  Matter settled favorably.
• AthenaHealth v. Carecloud (2016-2017) (CAFC): Represented AthenaHealth as lead appellate counsel in Federal Circuit appeal from PTAB post-grant proceedings involving computer system technology.
• Segway, Inc. and DEKA v. InMotion et al. (2014-2016) (ITC): As first-chair lead counsel, represented innovator companies DEKA and Segway in ITC investigation, involving patents related to control systems and software for personal motor vehicles. Successfully obtained rarely-granted General Exclusion Order.
• BTG v. Bioclon et al (2013-2014) (ITC): Served as lead partner representing BTG in ITC investigation involving patents related to antibody technology.
  Matter settled successfully on the eve of trial.
• ITT/Exelis v. Verizon Wireless, et al. (D. Delaware) (2011—2013): Represented Verizon Wireless, with codefendant Qualcomm, in patent infringement action regarding global positioning system (GPS) technology. Lead partner for Verizon Wireless. Matter settled favorably before trial.
• 3D Systems v. Formlabs (2013-2014) (S.D.N.Y.): Represented 3D printing technology company Formlabs in patent infringement action involving 8 patents related to 3D printing and related software technology. Served as lead partner. Matter settled successfully.
• Infineon Technologies AG v. Atmel Corp. (2011—2013) (D. Delaware): Represented Infineon as lead partner in complex patent infringement action involving 21 patents regarding semiconductor technology. Served as a lead partner on matter. Argued at Markman hearing.  Settled favorably before trial.
• In re Qimonda (2010-2012) (E.D. Virginia): Represented Infineon Technologies, IBM, Samsung, and Elpida Memory in multi-defendant/joint defense federal court proceedings (E.D. Virginia Bankruptcy) related to semiconductor patent licensing issues in the context of Chapter 15 Bankruptcy proceedings; prepared and examined senior client witnesses and examined them at trial. Successful bench trial.
• Overland Storage v. IBM (2010-2011) (ITC). Defended IBM as respondent in ITC investigation involving media storage devices. Matter settled successfully.
• Veveo v. Comcast (2013) (D. Massachusetts): Represented Veveo in patent infringement action involving 5 patents related to content search and software technology. Served as a lead partner. Matter settled favorably in 2013.
• Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft et al. (2007-2011) (S.D. California): Represented Alcatel-Lucent in a two-month-long patent infringement trial in California regarding computer technology. Served as the lead partner for four patents involving computer system and graphical user interface technology, including the patent that resulted in favorable verdict of infringement and validity. Successful jury verdict.
• Walker Digital v. SHL PreVisor et al (2011-2012) (D. Delaware): Represented SHL PreVisor in patent infringement action in federal district court in Delaware regarding software services and products. Served as lead partner. Matter settled favorably before trial in 2012.
• Samsung v. ON Semiconductor (D. Delaware): Represented Samsung as DJ plaintiff in patent infringement action in federal district court in Delaware regarding semiconductor technology. Served as lead partner for affirmative semiconductor patents and damages issues and took and defended primary liability expert witnesses and damages experts; favorable pre-trial settlement.
• Alpex et al. v. Zydus (2013-2014) (D. Delaware): Represented pharmaceutical companies Alpex and Citius as lead partner in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent infringement action involving patent related to certain pharmaceuticals. Matter settled successfully in December 2014.
• B. Braun Melsungen AG v. Terumo Medical (2009-2012) (D. Delaware): Represented Braun in patent infringement action in federal district court in Delaware regarding medical device products. Served as lead partner for liability expert; argued at Markman hearing and examined lead liability expert at jury trial; obtained successful Markman claim construction and favorable jury verdict of infringement and validity in 2012.
• GlaxoSmithKline v. Novartis (2008-2010) (D.D.C.): Represented GSK in a Section 146 action in federal district court (District of Columbia) to protect patented GSK chemical products; served as lead partner on matter; obtained favorable settlement.
• W.L. Gore v. Bard (2011-2012) (D. Delaware): Represented Bard in patent infringement action in federal district court in Delaware regarding stent graft technology and products.
• BASF, Inc. v. JMI (2009-2010) (D. Delaware): Represented BASF in a patent infringement action in federal district court in Delaware regarding chemical products. Served  as a lead partner; obtained favorable settlement.
• GlaxoSmithKline v. Mylan (D.N.J.) (2007-2008): Represented GSK in a Hatch Waxman ANDA litigation to protect Paxil CR® brand antidepressant; filed a patent infringement action and sought a TRO in federal district court (D. New Jersey). Served as a lead partner; obtained favorable resolution at the pleadings stage.
• Honeywell v. Solvay S.A. (Federal Circuit) (2009-2010): Represented Honeywell for Federal Circuit appeal in patent infringement action regarding chemical process technology, including drafting appellate briefs. Successful appeal leading to trial remand.
• Tessera v. Infineon Technologies AG (E.D. Texas) (2005-2007): Represented Infineon in patent infringement action involving patents regarding semiconductor technology. Matter settled favorably before trial.
• Samsung Electronics v. Matsushita/Panasonic Corp. (E.D. Texas) (2005-2008): Represented client as defendant and declaratory judgment plaintiff in patent infringement action in Texas regarding chemical process and semiconductor technology. Served as lead partner for two patents; obtained favorable settlement.
• Mosaid v. Infineon Technologies (E.D. Texas) (2005-2006): Defended Infineon in patent infringement action regarding semiconductor technology. Case settled favorably.
• Intuitive Surgical, Inc. v. California Institute of Technology (N.D. California and E.D. Texas) (2007-2008): Represented Intuitive Surgical as DJ plaintiff and defendant in patent infringement action regarding robotic surgical devices brought in California and Texas; obtained favorable settlement.
• TCS v. Research in Motion (RIM) (E.D. Virginia) (2007-2008):  Defended client RIM (BlackBerry) as defendant in patent infringement action in E.D. Virginia regarding wireless internet technology. Served as lead partner for developing non-infringement and damages theories and managing case. Case settled favorably before discovery.
• InPro II v. Research in Motion (RIM) et al. (Federal Circuit) (2005-2006): Represented client RIM (BlackBerry) for Federal Circuit appeal in patent infringement action regarding wireless email technology. Drafted and revised appellate briefs. Federal Circuit affirmance.
• Fortune 50 Financial Institution (2004-2005): Represented client for pre-filing litigation matters involving financial business method patents. Served as lead attorney responsible for prefiling investigation, including claim construction and infringement analysis. Matter settled prior to lawsuit.
• Medpointe Healthcare Inc. v. Hi-Tech Pharmacal (Federal Circuit) (2004-2005): Represented Medpointe Healthcare for Federal Circuit appeal and Petition for Certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court in patent infringement action regarding pharmaceutical products.
• Microstrategy Inc. v. Gelco Corp. (E.D. Virginia) (2003): Represented client as plaintiff in computer software copyright infringement action brought in the Eastern District of Virginia. Primarily responsible for motions for summary judgment and preliminary injunction briefing. Successfully obtained preliminary injunction. Case settled favorably thereafter.
• ACTV v. Walt Disney (S.D.N.Y. and CAFC) (2001-2004): Represented client as plaintiff in patent infringement action involving computer software technology.  Successful appeal after summary judgment led to settlement.
• ICU Medical v. B. Braun Medical (N.D. California) (2001-2005): Represented Braun patent infringement action in California regarding medical device products; obtained favorable mid-trial settlement.

Activities

• ITC Trial Lawyers Association
• American Intellectual Property Law Association
• The Arthur J Gajarsa American Inn of Court
• American Bar Association (Litigation and Intellectual Property Sections)
• Association of Former Law Clerks to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• Federal Circuit Bar Association
• Federal Circuit Historical Society
• Massachusetts Bar Association
• Boston Intellectual Property Law Association

Recognition

• Ranked among the top 1% of best overall performing litigators and among the top 3% of most active litigators—out of 17,052 attorneys—representing plaintiffs or defendants in Patexia’s Patent Litigation Intelligence Report
• Ranked among the top 3% of best performing and most active litigators at the ITC—out of 4,768 attorneys—representing respondents or complainants in Patexia’s ITC Intelligence Report
• Ranked among the top 5% of best performing and most active practitioners representing petitioners—out of 5,720 attorneys—practicing before the PTAB in Patexia’s IPR Intelligence Report
• Repeatedly named to the Massachusetts Super Lawyers list