Matt focuses his intellectual property practice on patent litigation, strategic IP counseling, and patent valuation. He has experience representing clients before the International Trade Commission (ITC), Federal district courts, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Matt’s practice covers complex technologies such as microprocessors, graphics processors, RF circuitry, LCD display systems, microelectromechanical systems, audio and video processing, VLSI design, consumer telecommunications systems, and DDR-compliant memory modules and DRAM.
Matt has held lead roles in multiple ITC investigations, where he managed teams of technologists, coordinated complex discovery efforts, developed infringement, validity, and claim construction positions, deposed fact and expert witnesses, and participated in evidentiary hearings. Matt has served as liaison in German enforcement programs, where he worked closely with foreign counsel to develop strategies for infringement and nullity proceedings. Additionally, he has served as counsel and liaison in multiple inter partes review and post-grant proceedings, where he developed and coordinated validity positions for patents being simultaneously asserted in multiple jurisdictions.
Matt also advises clients in complex IP transactions and related diligence, which involves developing and negotiating multiparty agreements and performing extensive transactional diligence on large domestic and international IP portfolios. Matt provides portfolio management strategies for high-technology companies, including those with standard-essential technology in the memory, RF, and telecommunication spaces. In addition to his work with electronic device and software companies, Matt works with university technology transfer offices to provide strategic IP guidance on portfolio management and patent valuation.
Before joining Mintz, Matt was a technology consultant and application architect for a software company in the Boston area. His work focused on enterprise-level data management and software development. Before that, Matt conducted research at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, focusing on molten alloy composition detection via x-ray fluorescence.
Experience
- SRAM LLC v. Princeton CarbonWorks, Inc., 9:21-cv-80581-RKA (S.D.Fla.) – Represented defendant Princeton CarbonWorks (PCW) in bet-the-company litigation, achieving a complete jury trial victory in the Southern District of Florida. SRAM, the second largest bicycle component manufacturer in the world, sued on two patents relating to high-end carbon fiber bike wheels and sought to put PCW out of business. After a two-week trial in February 2023, Mintz persuaded a nine-person jury to reach a defense verdict of no infringement on either patent, and no damages.
- Netlist Inc. v. SK hynix Inc., et al. (CDCA 8:16-cv-01605; 8:17-cv-01030): Represented plaintiff Netlist, Inc., a California memory module company, in asserting eight patents against the Korean-based memory giant SK hynix. The technology claimed by the asserted patents is essential to the JEDEC DDR4 RDIMM and LRDIMM standards.
- Certain Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Consumer Products Containing the Same (337-TA-1044) – Represented Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) as complainant in the ITC asserting patents covering graphics processing technology employed by smart devices such as televisions and handsets. Respondents include LG Electronics, VIZIO, MediaTek, and Sigma Designs, Inc. (SDI). Achieved settlement with LG prior to the conclusion of expert discovery. Following the evidentiary hearing, the presiding ALJ issued an initial determination finding a violation of Section 337 and recommending the imposition of an exclusion order against the remaining Respondents’ accused products. The ITC affirmed the ALJ’s finding of a violation on August 22, 2018. As a result, the Commission issued orders banning the importation of products made by VIZIO, MediaTek, and SDI and cease and desist orders against VIZIO and SDI.
- Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-984) – Represented owner of portfolio of graphics processing and microprocessor patents, Advanced Silicon Technologies, LLC, as Complainant in an ITC investigation adverse to a number of automotive manufacturers, and infotainment system and chip suppliers. Respondents include Honda, Toyota, BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, NVIDIA, Texas Instruments, Renesas, Harman International, and Fujitsu-Ten. The investigation instituted in January of 2016 and resolved favorably prior to the conclusion of expert discovery in August of 2016.
- Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing Capabilities (337-TA-884) - Represented owners of the patent portfolio of the original Silicon Graphics, now known as Graphics Properties Holdings, as complainant in the ITC. Investigation was instituted in June 2013 and among the respondent entities were Panasonic, Toshiba, Vizio, and ZTE. Most respondents settled. After an evidentiary hearing held over several days in May 2014, on August 29, 2014 Mintz successfully obtained a recommendation for a Limited Exclusion Order against the remaining respondent, which chose to settle while Commission review of the Administrative Law Judge’s Initial Determination was pending.
- Successful Defense of 12 IPRs – Three Dimensional Structure Memory: Mintz represented Elm 3DS Innovations in a series of 14 IPRs filed by leading technology companies, including SK Hynix, Micron, and Samsung. We were hired as replacement counsel following institution of the IPRs which had been filed in late 2015 and early 2016. Final Written decisions in the proceedings were received in June and August 2017 and confirmed validity of all but 2 of 107 challenged claims. PTAB's determination was upheld on appeal to the Federal Circuit. IPR2016-00386, IPR2016-00387, IPR2016-00388, IPR2016-00389, IPR2016-00390, IPR2016-00391, IPR2016-00393, IPR2016-00394, IPR2016-00395, IPR2016-00687, IPR2016-00691, IPR2016-00708, IPR2016-00770, IPR2016-00786
viewpoints
France Has Entered the Chat: Sun Patent Trust Asks French Court to Determine Global FRAND Rate for LTE-Advanced SEPs
June 7, 2024 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, Matthew Galica
Last week, Sun Patent Trust sued Xiaomi in France for infringement of patents claimed to be essential to the LTE-Advanced standard. In its suit, Sun Patent Trust asked French courts to set a global FRAND rate—something that has never occurred before.
In With the New? Not So Fast: The UPC’s First SEP Ruling Aligns With German Precedent
May 8, 2024 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, Andrew DeVoogd, Matthew Galica, James Thomson
To date, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has not held a trial involving standard-essential patents (SEPs). However, the new forum’s Mannheim Local Division has now authored its first SEP-specific order in a case between Panasonic and Xiaomi.
The Second Time’s a Charm: In New Damages Trial, Texas Jury More than Doubles Lump-Sum Award Against Samsung for Infringing Two SEPs
May 1, 2024 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, Andrew DeVoogd, Matthew Galica, James Thomson
On April 17, 2024, a second Texas jury assessed damages of $142 million against Samsung, more than doubling a previous jury award of $67.5 in a protracted standard essential patent (SEP) litigation brought by G+ Communications.
Apple Backs Down: Commits to Take Global FRAND License to Avoid Exile from UK Market
November 5, 2021 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, James Wodarski, Matthew Galica
Is This Seat Taken? A Chinese IP Court Proclaims Its Authority to Declare Global FRAND Terms
December 7, 2020 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, James Wodarski, Matthew Galica
THE SEP WORLD IN BALANCE: UK Harmonizes with Germany’s Rejection of Implementer Hold Out
August 26, 2020 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, James Wodarski, Daniel Weinger, Matthew Galica
IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO: The German Federal Supreme Court Acknowledges That Infringer Hold-Out is a Real Problem
July 16, 2020 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, James Wodarski, Matthew Galica
Actions Speak Louder Than Words: Germany’s Highest Court tells SEP implementers that simply saying that you are willing to license is not enough, and hold-out will not be tolerated
May 12, 2020 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, James Wodarski, Matthew Galica
PTAB Presses Pause On All Arthrex Remands
May 12, 2020 | Blog | By William Meunier , Daniel Weinger, Matthew Galica
Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing of Panel Decision in Arthrex, Which Held PTAB Appointments Were Unconstitutional
March 25, 2020 | Blog | By Daniel Weinger, Michael Newman, Matthew Galica
News & Press
BOSTON – Nine Intellectual Property attorneys from Mintz have been recognized in the 2024 edition of the Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Strategy 300 Global Leaders Guide.
Mintz is pleased to announce that Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Members Matthew Galica, Frank Gerratana, Marguerite McConihe, Michael Newman, Adam Rizk, Adam Samansky, Daniel Weinger, and James Wodarski have been named to the 2023 IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists list.
Mintz has secured a significant and complete defense verdict for client Princeton CarbonWorks, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The Connecticut-based bicycle wheel maker was accused of infringing two patents by competitor and industry giant SRAM, LLC.
Mintz Guides Nanoco Group in $150M Patent Litigation Settlement
February 03, 2023
Mintz secured a $150 million settlement for Nanoco Group plc in the company’s patent infringement litigation against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. Mintz Member Michael Newman led a team that represented the maker of cadmium-free quantum dots and other nanomaterials in a federal district court in Texas and before the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Mintz Promotes Nine to Member
December 15, 2021
The PTAB Has Another Appointment With the Federal Circuit + SEPs Have a Little More Bite at the ITC
October 30, 2019
SK Hynix Memory Products Infringe Netlist IP, ITC Judge Finds
October 22, 2019
The article noted that the Mintz team representing Netlist includes Member and Chair of the Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, along with Members James Wodarski, Drew DeVoogd, Steve Akerley, Aarti Shah, and Associates Kristina Cary, Matthew Galica, and Tiffany Knapp.
In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed decisions upholding the validity of nearly a dozen Elm patents on semiconductor technologies that accused infringers challenged at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
The Mintz team representing Elm includes Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, Members William Meunier, James Wodarski and Michael Newman, Special Counsel Sandra Badin, and Associates Kevin Amendt and Matthew Galica.
Events & Speaking
Startup Legal: Feedback from Boston's Top Startup Lawyers
Mintz Levin, One Financial Center, Boston, MA
Recognition & Awards
Named to IAM Strategy 300: Global Leaders (2024)
Recent Insights
