Lowell Mead

Lowell efficiently drives intellectual property (IP) and technology disputes toward success for his clients. His practice encompasses patent, trade secret, breach of contract, licensing and other technology-related litigation and counseling. He has more than 20 years of experience spanning all phases of pre-litigation, litigation, trial and appeals across a wide range of subject matters, in courts across the US and in arbitration. With a long track record of victories on behalf of his clients, Lowell ranked among the top 10 best performing attorneys nationwide out of more than 11,000 attorneys representing defendants in patent lawsuits over the past five years, as reported by Patexia.

Lowell’s representative matters:

• Won a patent defense jury trial on cellular communication technology (Northern District of California)
• Won summary judgment of noninfringement on smartphone camera technology (Eastern District of Texas)
• Won assertion of trade secret claims and related claims against a defendant, resulting in a stipulated injunction (California Superior Court)
• Won a motion to transfer venue and then judgment on the pleadings for lack of standing based on contract terms (Western District of Texas/Northern District of California)
• Won summary judgment of noninfringement on cellular communication technology (District of Delaware)
• Won a motion to transfer venue and then stipulated judgment of noninfringement after favorable claim construction on natural language processing technology (Northern District of Texas/Northern District of California)
• Won an arbitration with a monetary award in a dispute arising from a client’s acquisition of patents and related IP
• Won a patent defense on boat construction design technology after successfully challenging prior conveyance of patents in suit in bankruptcy proceedings (Eastern District of Texas)
• Won summary judgment of noninfringement on Bluetooth technology (Central District of California)
• Won summary judgment of noninfringement on file organization software technology (Southern District of New York)
• Won a walk-away dismissal with prejudice after invalidating a patent in suit in a US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) reexamination on computer bus architecture technology (Eastern District of Texas)
• Won stipulated judgment of noninfringement after favorable claim construction ruling on file indexing and searching technology (Western District of Texas)
• Won an invalidity victory through inter partes reviews and Section 101 invalidity on information management technology (Northern District of California)
• Won an invalidity victory at the USPTO in an inter partes reexamination on real-time search technology leading to a dismissal of the litigation with prejudice (District of Delaware)
• Won a voluntary dismissal with prejudice of patent claims on device imaging technology (District of Delaware)
• Won a voluntary walk-away dismissal of patent claims on computer security and authentication technology (District of Delaware)
• Won an invalidity victory through inter partes review and dismissal of litigation on search and display technology (District of Delaware)
• Won a voluntary walk-away dismissal of patent claims based on a contractual standing issue (Western District of Texas)
• Won an invalidity victory through inter partes reviews and dismissal of litigation on media player technology (District of Minnesota)
• Acted as lead counsel in an arbitration victory on a patent assignment dispute
• Won a Section 101 invalidity judgment on dual-sensor digital camera technology (Northern District of California)
• Won a Section 101 invalidity judgment on interactive website technology (Central District of California)
• Won a Section 101 invalidity judgment on online ordering system technology (District of Delaware)
• Won a Section 101 invalidity judgment on digital image processing technology (Central District of California)
• Won a Section 101 invalidity judgment on file management technology (Northern District of California)
• Won a motion to transfer venue and then a Section 101 invalidity judgment on location-based services technology (District of Nevada/Northern District of California)
• Won a dismissal with prejudice after an ex parte reexamination rejection of patent on location-based application services (Eastern District of Texas)
• Won a large-scale arbitration on a computer component license agreement dispute
• Won a dismissal with prejudice after Section 101 invalidity rulings on file synchronization technology (Western District of Texas)
• Won a dismissal with prejudice after defeating the plaintiff’s motion to amend infringement contentions on multimode network communication technology (Northern District of California)
• Secured a favorable settlement in assertion of trade secrets and related claims against a former employee (California Superior Court)
• Secured favorable settlements for a plaintiff-patentee after a favorable claim construction ruling on teleconferencing technology (Eastern District of Texas)
• Defeated four out of six inter partes review petitions on technologies – including multimedia data control, voice messaging protocols, security architectures and location-based processing – on behalf of a plaintiff-patentee
• Argued multiple appeals at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, including an affirmance victory on behalf of a top consumer electronics company
• Secured favorable settlements in several matters involving technologies – including server hot-swapping (District of Delaware), remote desktop access (Eastern District of Texas), container display interfaces (Western District of Washington), online content creation (Eastern District of Texas), operating system containerization (District of Delaware), web-based map interfaces (Eastern District of Texas), mobile device security (Southern District of New York), multi-interface search and display (District of Delaware), email filtering (Eastern District of Texas) and multimedia processing (Northern District of California)

Related articles

• Highlighted in “Cooley Earns High Marks in Patexia’s Patent Litigation 2023 Intelligence Report,” February 10, 2023
• Co-author, “ Oil Tech Patent Ruling Drills Down on Indefiniteness,” Law360, February 6, 2023