Nathan S. Mammen

Intellectual Property Trial Litigation

• Beidermann Technologies GmbH & Co. v. K2M, Inc. (E.D. Va.) — representing Beidermann in a multi-patent action involving spinal implant technology.
• Certain Blow-Molded Bag-in-Container Devices; Certain Beverage Dispensing Systems (ITC) — successfully represented Heineken in defensive and offensive patent-based ITC investigations relating to blow-molding plastic bottles and drink machines.
• Certain Solid State Storage Drives (ITC) — represented Samsung in patent-based ITC investigation; case settled favorably on the eve of trial.
• Baker Hughes, A GE Company, LLC v. Ulterra Drilling Technologies, L.P. — represented Ulterra in district court infringement action and ten inter partes review proceedings involving petroleum drill bit technology; case settled favorably shortly after filing of IPRs.
• Certain Radio Frequency Identification Products; Neology, Inc. v. Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS, Inc. (ITC, D. Del, & PTAB) — successfully represented Kapsch TrafficCom in a multi-jurisdiction patent infringement action and inter partes review concerning patents alleged to be essential to the 6C/Gen2 RFID standard. Obtained PTAB decision invalidating multiple claims of four patents. Obtained dismissal of ITC Investigation 337-TA-979 after proving at trial that the two patents at issue were invalid on multiple grounds.
• Represented major electronics manufacturer in international arbitration concerning valuation of a portfolio of thousands of patents.
• Element Six U.S. Corporation v Schlumberger Technology Corp. (S.D. Tex. 2014) — represented Schlumberger in declaratory judgment action involving twelve of client’s patents; obtained dismissal of case.
• Certain Wireless Communications Equipment, Inv. No. 337-TA-866 (ITC) (2013) — represented Samsung in ITC investigation concerning wireless communication technologies.
• Represented major defense contractor in international arbitration with foreign competitor concerning intellectual property rights to sensitive defense technology.

Intellectual Property Appellate Litigation

• Neology, Inc. v. International Trade Commission (Fed. Cir. 2019) — successfully argued appeal for Kapsch TrafficCom achieving affirmance of ITC decision finding no violation because competitor’s patents were invalid for lack of written description.
• Cobalt Boats, LLC v. Brunswick Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2019) — obtained complete reversal on appeal for Brunswick following a trial in which the jury found willful infringement and the district court enhanced damages, awarded attorneys’ fees, and entered a permanent injunction.
• In re Avaya Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2019) — successfully defended appeal of bankruptcy court’s favorable estimation of a creditor’s claim in a first-of-its-kind decision applying patent-law apportionment jurisprudence to valuation of trade secret claims.
• Neology, Inc. v. Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018) — successfully argued appeal for Kapsch TrafficCom resulting in affirmance of inter partes review decision that patents asserted against Kapsch in litigation were invalid.
• Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi (Fed. Cir. 2017) — successfully represented major pharmaceutical manufacturers in reversing an adverse judgment and remanding for a new trial on whether competitor’s cholesterol-lowering antibody patents are valid.
• OSRAM Sylvania, Inc. v. American Induction Technologies, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2012) — Represented Plaintiff-Appellant in a successful appeal at Federal Circuit; obtained reversal of district court summary judgment ruling invalidating patent.
• Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore (Fed. Cir. 2012), cert denied 133 S. Ct. 932 (2013) — Represented Plaintiff-Appellee in an appeal to the Federal Circuit defending a jury verdict of willful infringement, including a nine-figure damages verdict and an ongoing royalty award.
• SLR Partners v. B. Braun Medical, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2010) (S.D. Cal. 2009) — Represented B. Braun Medical in company-threatening patent infringement action, successfully defeating attempts to preclude Braun from marketing its innovative IV catheter and medical connector products.
• Successfully represented leading electronics manufacture in multiple Federal Circuit appeals of inter partes review decisions.

Other Trial and Appellate Litigation

• Tippins v. United States (Court of Federal Claims) — representing six Coast Guards veterans in class action challenging the government’s forced retirement of hundreds of senior enlisted personnel.
• Code v. McCarthy (D.C. Cir. 2020) — represented veteran challenging administrative board’s refusal to correct service record; argued appeal.
• In re Cipro I and II (California Superior Court) — represented generic drug manufacturer in class action raising antitrust claims based on settlement of patent case.
• Disability Rights New Jersey, Inc. v. Commissioner, New Jersey Department of Human Services (3d Cir. 2014) — Represented N.J. protection and advocacy system for persons with disabilities in landmark appeal involving American with Disabilities Act and Due Process challenges to a New Jersey policy for forcible medication of involuntarily committed patients in state hospitals; argued appeal.
• United States v. Mason (4th Cir. 2014) — Represented federal habeas petitioner; argued appeal.
• Robertson v. Shinseki (Fed. Cir. 2013) — Represented veteran in an appeal concerning a Presidential Pardon; argued appeal.
• Heino v. Shinseki (Fed. Cir. 2012) — Represented veteran in challenge to VA regulation concerning medication copayments; argued appeal.
• Lambert v. Johnson (4th Cir. 2010) — Represented federal habeas petitioner; obtained reversal of the district court decision denying client federal habeas relief; represented client in state-court appellate proceedings.
• Ruelas v. Wolfenbarger (6th Cir. 2009) — Represented federal habeas petitioner; argued appeal.

Patent Examiner, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1999–2005

Intern, Office of the House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, 2003