IP Litigation
Intellectual Property
IP Counseling & Patents


Michael Levin is a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, where he specializes in intellectual property litigation and counseling for technology companies with a focus on patent litigation, especially in the areas of software, networking, cellular and wireless telecommunications, graphical user interfaces, and electronic trading. Since joining the firm in 1995, Mike has represented technology companies in more than 50 intellectual property disputes across the country, including patent disputes in district court and before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). In addition, Mike has successfully handled more than a dozen U.S. and international arbitrations in the AAA, ICDR, and ICC, securing for his clients two of the largest IP awards of the last decade, which totaled more than $400 million.

Michael has been recognized in Northern California Super Lawyers every year since 2005. In addition, he has been recognized in 2013 and 2014 in Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine's IAM Patent 1000 – World's Leading Patent Practitioners guide, in which he was praised for his IP litigation expertise, including his ability to bridge the gap between the contentious and non-contentious practices by specializing in licensing disputes, with one commentator noting that he has "superb knowledge of portfolio licensing issues and is easy to work with."

Prior to joining Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Michael served as a law clerk to Judge Ronald M. Whyte of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

  • Charles Schwab
  • GoDaddy
  • Interactive Brokers Group
  • InterDigital Communications
  • Plumtree Software/BEA Systems (now owned by Oracle)
  • Scottrade
  • TD Ameritrade
  • TIBCO Software Inc.
  • TiVo
  • Voltage Security
  • InterDigital v. Huawei et al.; In Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities (337-TA-800) (USITC; D. Del.). Representing InterDigital in patent infringement action in ITC and district court relating to WCDMA and CDMA2000 wireless devices.
  • InterDigital v. Samsung (ICC; SDNY; Second Circuit). Successfully represented InterDigital in arbitrations and litigation against Samsung involving 2G and 3G wireless technology:
  • InterDigital v. Nokia (ICC; SDNY). Prosecuted successful multi-week international arbitration in patent license dispute for InterDigital, resulting in award yielding client $253 million. Arbitration award confirmed by U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. See InterDigital Communications Corp. v. Nokia Corp., 407 F. Supp. 2d 522 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). Reported as one of the largest IP verdicts in 2005 by IP Law Bulletin, Nov. 2005.
  • Datamize v. Plumtree Software and BEA Systems (N.D. Cal.). Lead counsel in successful defense of Plumtree and BEA Systems in suits involving three patents for customized web portals.
    • Obtained summary judgment of invalidity on indefiniteness; successfully argued Federal Circuit appeal, securing complete affirmance in seminal indefiniteness decision involving phrase "aesthetically pleasing look and feel." See Datamize v. Plumtree, 417 F.3d 1342, 75 U.S.P.Q.2d 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
    • Successfully defeated motion to dismiss of declaratory judgment action on continuation patents. See Datamize v. Plumtree, 473 F.3d 1152 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
    • Obtained favorable settlement and dismissal of case following successful motion to disqualify opposing counsel.
  • Protegrity, Inc. v. Voltage Security Inc. (D. Conn.). Lead counsel defending computer security vendor Voltage Security in 3-patent suit involving database encryption technology. Obtained summary judgment invalidating several claims of patents-in-suit and favorable Markman ruling.
  • Telephia v. M:Metrics, Inc. (N.D. Cal.). Obtained summary judgment of noninfringement for client M:Metrics in suit on patent relating to collection of data on wireless devices, resulting in favorable settlement and dismissal.
  • Datamize v. Interactive Brokers Group (E.D. Tex.). Lead counsel in successful defense of client IBG in patent infringement action, obtaining dismissal with prejudice.
  • Trading Technologies v. TD AMERITRADE and Interactive Brokers (N.D. Ill.). Lead counsel defending on-line brokerages in suits alleging infringement of more than a dozen patents relating to graphical user interfaces used for trading securities. Successfully obtained summary judgment of invalidity as to several of the patents-in-suit.
  • Droplets, Inc. v. E*TRADE, TD Ameritrade, Charles Schwab, Scottrade et al. (S.D.N.Y). Lead counsel defending four online brokerages in suit alleging infringement of patents relating to presenting information across a network using an interactive link. Successfully obtained transfer of case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Southern District of New York.
  • Mesa Verde v. E*TRADE, TD AMERITRADE, Interactive Brokers, Forex Capital Markets, and Sharebuilder (C.D. Cal.). Lead counsel in successful defense of five on-line brokerages accused of infringing patent related to mobile trading platform, obtaining favorable settlements.
  • Broadband Graphics v. TIBCO Software Inc. (W.D. Wash.); Broadband Graphics v. Forex Capital Markets (E.D. Wash.). Successfully defended TIBCO and Forex Capital Markets in suits alleging infringement of several graphical user interface patents, obtaining favorable settlements.
  • Web.com v. The Go Daddy Group (D. Ariz.; N.D. Ga.). Defended Go Daddy in patent infringement action brought by Web.com on four patents relating to web hosting technology. Obtained dismissal of original Georgia action based on lack of personal jurisdiction. See Web.com v. Go Daddy, Case No. 06-cv-01461-TCB (N.D. Ga. Aug. 3, 2007, Docket No. 30). After locating and proving up key prior art, secured favorable settlement for client.
  • Epicor Software v. Bowen & Groves (C.D. Cal.). Obtained preliminary injunction against competitor in copyright dispute for client Epicor.
  • Gilbarco v. Octel Communications (N.D. Cal.). Successfully defended Octel in patent dispute, obtaining summary judgment of unenforceability and recovery of more than $1 million in attorneys' fees from patentee, including affirmance of summary judgment and attorneys' fees orders on appeal to Federal Circuit. See Gilbarco v. Octel, 1996 WL 75304 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 15. 1996), aff'd, 113 F.3d 1255 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (summary judgment of inequitable conduct); Gilbarco v. Octel, 194 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (affirming award of attorneys' fees).
  • Handled more than a dozen matters for clients relating to claims of alleged copyright infringement brought by the Business Software Alliance (BSA) and the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA).
  • J.D., UCLA Law School, 1994
    Order of the Coif; Editor, UCLA Law Review
    • Extern to Justice Edward Panelli of the Supreme Court of California, Fall 1993
    • Extern to Judge Harry Pregerson and Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Summer 1992
  • B.A., Harvard College, 1991
    Cum Laude
  • Barrister, Bay Area Intellectual Property Inn of Court
  • Member, ITC Trial Lawyers Association (ITCTLA)
  • Member, Association of Business Trial Lawyers (ABTL)
  • Member, California State Bar, Sections on Intellectual Property and Litigation
  • Recognized in Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine's 2013 and 2014 IAM Patent 1000 - World's Leading Patent Practitioners guides
  • Selected for inclusion in Northern California Super Lawyers, 2005-2014
  • Recipient, Guardian of Justice Award from the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County for pro bono work defending a victim of domestic abuse, 1999
  • State Bar of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. Supreme Court

Contact Information

650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Phone | 650-320-4929
Fax | 650-493-6811

Email | Michael Levinmlevin@wsgr.com

Print to PDF