People

Overview

Michael Knierim is a seasoned patent litigator who has represented both plaintiffs and defendants throughout all stages of patent disputes brought before district courts, the International Trade Commission, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. With his background in physics, Mr. Knierim maintains a diverse practice spanning a broad range of technological fields, including media and telecommunications, optics, electronics, medical devices, imaging, as well as software and business methods, where he leverages his proficiency in writing and reading source code.

Clients and colleagues have recognized Mr. Knierim for his deep technical strength across numerous areas, as well as his skill leveraging that strength in the courtroom to effectively cross-examine expert witnesses at trial. He also has experience arguing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in multiple inter partes reviews.

In addition to patent litigation, Mr. Knierim also counsels clients on patent portfolio development and strategies, patent validity and infringement, and clearance in connection with due diligence matters. He has also advised clients on a variety of standard essential patent (SEP) and standards-related issues, including patent pool formation and participation, prosecution of essential patents, and litigation involving SEPs. He has experience with numerous standard setting organizations and technical standards, including IEEE 802.11, Bluetooth, MPEG-4, AVC, MVC, HEVC, ATSC, Blu-ray, MPEG-DASH, and LTO.

Admission & Affiliations

  • New York State Bar
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office
  • New York Intellectual Property Law Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • J.D., William and Mary Law School 2011
    Order of the Coif
    Member, William & Mary Law Review
  • B.A., Physics, College of the Holy Cross 2008
    cum laude
    Sigma Pi Sigma

Experience

Representative Cases

  • Moxchange LLC v. Avigilon USA Corporation (D. Del.) – representation of Avigilon in patent dispute concerning Wi-Fi encryption and authentication.
  • Uniloc 2017 v. Sling TV (D. Colo. and U.S.P.T.O.) – representation of Sling TV in patent dispute concerning video encoding and web presentation technologies and challenging claims in inter partes review.
  • Sound View Innovations, LLC v. DISH Network LLC (D. Colo. and U.S.P.T.O.) – representation of DISH Network and Sling TV in patent dispute concerning adaptive bitrate streaming technologies and challenging claims in inter partes review.
  • Mobile Networking Solutions, LLC v. Sling Media LLC (D. Del.) – representation of Sling Media in patent dispute concerning database storage systems.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1012; U.S.P.T.O.) – representation of Fujifilm in ITC Investigation of Sony's infringement of a number of Fujifilm patents related to magnetic tape data storage technologies and defense of patent in inter partes review.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1036; U.S.P.T.O.) – representation of Fujifilm in ITC Investigation filed by Sony related to magnetic tape data storage technologies and challenging claims in inter partes review.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1058) – representation of Fujifilm in ITC Investigation filed by Sony related to magnetic tape data storage technologies.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (II) (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1076) – representation of Fujifilm in ITC Investigation of Sony's infringement of a number of Fujifilm patents related to magnetic tape data storage technologies.
  • SVV Technology Innovations Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (W.D. Tex.) – defended Samsung in a patent infringement suit relating to optical collectors for solar energy applications alleged to have been used in backlight units for televisions and computer monitors.
  • American Patents LLC v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) - defended Samsung in a patent infringement suit related to communication networks and virtual input systems.
  • Cypress Lake Software, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (E.D. Tex. and U.S.P.T.O.) - represented Samsung in patent infringement suit and inter partes review and ex parte review proceedings relating to streaming and video interface technologies.
  • Huvepharma, Inc. v. Associated British Foods, plc et al. (D. Del.) – represented Plaintiff Huvepharma in patent infringement action relating to enzymatic animal feed additives.
  • Huvepharma, Inc. v. EI du Pont de Nemours Co. et al. (D. Del.) – represented Plaintiff Huvepharma in patent infringement action relating to enzymatic animal feed additives.
  • Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al. (D. Del.) – represented AT&T in defense of patent infringement allegations relating to wireless communications technologies.
  • Innovative Display Technologies LLC et al. v. AT&T Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.) – represented AT&T in defense of patent infringement allegations relating to LCD backlight optics.
  • Ameranth, Inc. v. Seamless North America, LLC; Ameranth, Inc. v. GrubHub, Inc. (S.D. Cal.) – represented leading online and mobile food ordering company in defense of patent infringement suit relating to food ordering systems.
  • Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. Progressive Corp. et al. (N.D. Ohio) – represented Plaintiff Hartford in patent litigation relating to insurance processing system technologies.

IP Counseling and Patent Prosecution

  • Columbia University – patent prosecution and counseling concerning licensing, standard essentiality, and patent pools
  • The University of Pennsylvania – patent prosecution
  • International energy company – patent prosecution
  • International aerospace and defense company – patent prosecution
  • International medical device company - due diligence, patent prosecution and procurement, product clearance and opinion writing
  • International financial services software company – counseling regarding internal intellectual property procedures and training, patent prosecution
  • Startup software company – IP counseling and patent prosecution