VERA M. ELSON

Partner
 
IP Litigation

EXPERIENCE:

Vera M. Elson is a partner and trial lawyer based in Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Palo Alto office. Her practice is focused on intellectual property trials and strategic counseling for high technology clients.

She primarily handles patent cases in federal district courts across the country and proceedings before the International Trade Commission. She has extensive trial experience in high-stakes cases, including both jury trials and bench trials. Vera has also successfully litigated cases related to trade secret misappropriation, common law, and copyright claims. She has argued and won before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. She is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Early in her career, she was an intern for the late Chief Judge Helen W. Nies of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Prior to law school, Vera worked as an electrical engineer doing high-speed circuit design.

REPRESENTATIVE IP MATTERS IN FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS:
  • Pragmatus v. Aspect Software (D. Del.). Representing Aspect in a patent case relating to automated call distribution technology.
  • Pragmatus v. Seagate (D. Del.). Representing Seagate in a patent case and related indemnity action.
  • Data Speed v. Alfresco (D. Del.). Represented Alfresco in a patent case related to a SCSI-interface networking system.
  • Nomadix v. HP et al. (C.D. Cal.). Represented Aruba Networks against claims of patent infringement relating to controllers for secure, large-scale deployments of wireless LANs and access points.
  • Tessera v. ST Microelectronics (N.D. Cal.). Defended ST Microelectronics against claims including breach of contract and patent infringement.
  • LML v. Deutsche Bank (E.D. Tex.). Defended Deutsche Bank against patent claims involving a method of conducting ACH transactions. Settled favorably on the eve of trial.
  • Convolve v. Seagate Technology et al. (S.D.N.Y.). Represented Seagate Technology in trade secret misappropriation and patent case involving disk drives and GUI interfaces. Prevailed on summary judgment; currently pending appeal by Convolve. This case prompted the landmark Federal Circuit decision In Re Seagate Technology, in which the CAFC overturned 24 years of precedent in Seagate's favor on the issue of willfulness.
  • TCS v. Sybase (E.D. Va.). Defended Sybase against claims of patent infringement in a case involving telecommunications gateways. Settled favorably following Markman.
  • Volumetrics Medical Imaging v. GE Healthcare et al. (M.D.N.C.). Successfully defended the GE Healthcare and GE Medical Systems in a patent suit involving ultrasound medical imaging technology.
  • Enterasys Networks, Inc. v. Extreme Networks, Inc. (D. Mass.). Represented Extreme Networks in a patent infringement case (six patents-in-suit) that eventually was stayed pending reexam.
  • Lucent Technologies v. Extreme Networks (D. Del.). Obtained a defense verdict for Extreme Networks in a case involving network protocols, virtual connections, and blade servers. Obtained one of only two favorable defense jury verdicts out of fourteen patent jury verdicts that year.
  • Legato (now EMC Corp.) v. Network Specialists, Inc. (N.D. Cal.). Successfully represented Legato/EMC in a patent case involving server backup and storage systems that resolved favorably following summary judgment.
  • Trend Micro Inc. v. Network Associates, Inc. (formerly McAfee) (N.D. Cal.). Successfully defended Network Associates in a patent case involving virus detection and network security software. The matter settled during trial.
  • Townshend v. Rockwell/Conexant Corp. (N.D. Cal.). Successfully represented Brent Townshend in a patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation case involving 56K modem technology.
  • Chips & Technologies v. Opti Computer (N.D. Cal.). Represented OPTi Computer in a DRAM memory patent infringement case.
  • Burr-Brown v. Gain Technology (Arizona State Court). Represented start-up Gain Technology in a trade secret misappropriation case involving operational amplifier technology. The court ruled in favor of Gain Technology following a bench trial.
REPRESENTATIVE APPELLATE MATTERS:
  • Grail v. Mitsubishi (California State Court). Represented Mitsubishi Electric U.S. in a breach of NDA case involving SRAM and DRAM memory products.
  • Pioneer Magnetics v. Micro Linear (C.D. Cal.). Obtained victory for Micro Linear on summary judgment in a patent case involving power amplifiers. Vera argued the appeal, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
REPRESENTATIVE ITC SECTION 337 (PATENT) ACTIONS:
  • In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephone Handsets, Wireless Communication Devices, and Components Thereof. Represented Qualcomm in a patent infringement action brought by client against Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc.
  • In the Matter of Certain Voltage Regulator Circuits. Represented Linear Technology in a successful patent infringement action brought by client against Monolithic Power Systems.
  • In the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuit Chipsets, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same. Represented VIA Technologies in the successful resolution of a breach of license and patent infringement action brought by Intel Corp. against client.
  • In the Matter of Certain CD-ROM Controllers and Products Containing Same II. Represented United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) in a patent infringement action brought by Oak Technologies against client, one of the largest integrated circuit foundaries in Taiwan. The ALJ found in favor of client.
  • In the Matter of Certain Static Random Access Memories. Represented United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) in a SRAM patent action brought by SGS-Thomson Microelectronics, Inc. against client. Successfully resolved before the hearing.
  • In the Matter of Certain Low Power Computer Hard Disk Drive Systems and Products Containing Same. Represented Conner Peripherals in a power management patents action brought by client against IBM. Successfully resolved before the hearing.
  • In the Matter of Certain Microcomputer Memory Controllers, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same. Represented OPTi Computer in a memory controller patents action brought by Chips and Technologies, Inc. against client and co-defendant ETEQ Microsystems, Inc. Successfully resolved before the hearing.
EDUCATION:
  • J.D., University of Southern California, Gould School of Law
  • M.S., Electrical Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles
  • B.S., Cybernetics, University of California, Los Angeles
ASSOCIATIONS AND MEMBERSHIPS:
  • Steering Committee Member, Working Group 10 of the Sedona Conference, 2012
HONORS:
  • Recognized in the 2005-2011 editions of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business as a leader in Intellectual Property
  • Honored among the Daily Journal's "Top 50 Intellectual Property Litigators" in 2008 and 2009
  • Recognized as one of the Daily Journal's "Top Women Litigators" in California in 2008 and 2009
  • Named among Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal's "Women of Influence" in 2008
  • Recognized as a leading intellectual property lawyer by Legal 500 US
  • Selected for inclusion in Northern California Super Lawyers
SELECT PUBLICATIONS:
  • "Federal Circuit Ruling Provides Guidance for Showing Worldwide Damages," Daily Journal, April 10, 2013
  • Co-author, "Proving Worldwide Damages in Patent Infringement Disputes," Los Angeles Daily Journal, January 28, 2013
  • Co-author, "Why Patent Assertion Entities Are Transitioning to the ITC," Law360, January 25, 2013
  • "The Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege & Use of Non-Liability Opinions After In re Seagate," The Sedona Conference Journal, October 2008
  • "Reviewing Competitors' Patents: Are There Risks?" Strategic Patenting Manual, Spring 2000
  • "Throw a Party, Lose Your Patent Rights!" Design News, April 10, 1995
SELECT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:
  • Faculty, "Post-Grant Patent Trials," Practising Law Institute's Litigation Section, 2013
  • Faculty, "Damages Update," Advanced IP Track, Silicon Valley Association of General Counsels All-Hands Meeting, 2012
  • Faculty, "Damages: Comparable Licenses," Practising Law Institute's Litigation Section, 2012
  • Faculty, "Joint Infringement," Advanced IP Track, Silicon Valley Association of General Counsels All-Hands Meeting, 2011
  • Faculty, "An Overview of the America Invents Act," Berkeley Conference on Law & Technology, 2011
  • Faculty, "Juror Perceptions in a Patent Case," Practising Law Institute's Litigation Section, 2011
  • Faculty, "The Impact of the Ariad En Banc Decision," Practising Law Institute's Litigation Section, 2010
  • Faculty, "Mock Direct and Cross-Examination of an Expert," Practising Law Institute's Litigation Section, 2007 and 2009
  • Faculty, Panel Discussion of Recent Seminal Cases, The Sedona Conference, 2008
ADMISSIONS:
  • State Bar of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Contact Information

650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Phone | 650-849-3495
Fax | 650-493-6811

633 West Fifth Street
15th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone | 323-210-2900
Fax | 866-974-7329

Email | Vera Elsonvelson@wsgr.com

Print to PDF