Neil P. Sirota

Deputy Department Chair - Intellectual Property (New York) Partner

Neil Sirota Photo

New York

P: +1.212.408.2548 F: +1.212.259.2548
  • ACTV, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co. (S.D.N.Y.) represented ACTV in patent suit relating to internet/television convergence; case settled before trial.
  • AI Automation, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) defended Samsung in patent suit relating to recognizing and performing handwritten calculations.  Received early summary judgment of non-infringement.
  • American Bio Medica Corp. v. DiPro Diagnostic Products, Inc. (D. Del.) defended DiPro in design patent and trade dress infringement suit relating to diagnostic drug test kit; received transfer to S.D. Cal. and case settled shortly thereafter.
  • Apeldyn Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (D. Del.) received summary judgment of both non-infringement and invalidity for Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to liquid crystal display driving system and method.
  • Anvik Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (S.D.N.Y.) defended Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to scanning microlithography; received summary judgment of patent invalidity for failure to disclose best mode.
  • Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (D. Del.) defended Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to vertical alignment mode liquid crystal display devices; received summary judgment of invalidity for failure to disclose best mode on one of two asserted patents, as well as summary judgment of non-infringement for most asserted claims in second patent; settled before trial.
  • ContentGuard Holdings, Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. (E.D. Tex.) defended Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to digital rights management technologies; jury verdict of non-infringement.
  • Dell, Inc. v. This Old Store (N.D. Tex.) – represented Dell in suit against unauthorized reseller of Dell computers; settled before trial.
  • Displeigh LLC. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (N.D. Tex.) – defended Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to digital photograph displays; case dismissed by plaintiff with prejudice after invalidity contentions served.
  • Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) defended Samsung in patent infringement suit relating to mobile phone antenna technology.
  • Grecia v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (S.D.N.Y.) defended Samsung in a patent suit relating to digital content protection and secure financial transactions. Favorable result awarded during claim construction when the court found that all asserted claims are indefinite.
  • Honeywell International, Inc. v. Hitachi, Ltd. (D. Del.) represented Hitachi in patent infringement suit relating to liquid crystal display backlight arrangement; case settled after depositions.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1012) represented Fujifilm in ITC Investigation of Sony's infringement of Fujifilm patents related to magnetic tape data storage technologies; received limited exclusion order.
  • In the Matter of Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof (International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1058) represented Fujifilm in ITC Investigation filed by Sony related to magnetic tape data storage technologies.
  • Intellectual Properties Development Corp. v. Tele-Communications, Inc./ AT&T Broadband LLC (S.D.N.Y.) defended TCI/ AT&T and related companies in separate actions (multi-district litigation) in a patent infringement suit involving hybrid fiber coax cable television systems; obtained summary judgment of invalidity and non-infringement on all asserted claims; Federal Circuit affirmed on non-infringement grounds.
  • Koninklijke KPN B.V. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex. and U.S.P.T.O.) represented Samsung and subsidiary SmartThings in patent infringement suit and inter partes reviews related to multiple technologies: email networks, telecommunication network congestion, turbo coding, and internet of things; received summary judgment of non-infringement on one patent; case settled.
  • Masco Corp. v. Price Pfister (E.D. Va.) represented Masco d/b/a Delta Faucet in suit involving cross claims of design patent and trade dress infringement and other state law causes of action; obtained jury verdict in Masco’s favor; Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal.
  • Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company v. North American Science Associates, Inc. (D. Minn.) defended NAMSA in patent suit relating to medical instrument sterilization techniques; case settled before trial.
  • Negotiated Data Solutions, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) represented Samsung in patent suit relating to universal serial bus (USB) data transfer; case settled.
  • Patentmarks Communications LLC v. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (D. Del.) represented Samsung in patent suit relating to multiple path wireless telecommunications technologies; case settled.
  • Plasma Physics Corp. (E.D.N.Y.) represented Plasma Physics in multiple suits against semiconductor chip manufacturers asserting patents relating to semiconductor processing using plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD); cases settled prior to trial.
  • Power Mosfet Technologies, Inc. v. Infineon Technologies A.G. (E.D. Tex.) defended Infineon and related companies in a patent infringement suit relating to power transistor structures; prevailed at a bench trial; Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal.
  • Richardson v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) represented Samsung in patent suit related to photo animation effects; case settled prior to trial.
  • Theis v. Northern Telecom, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) defended Northern Telecom in patent suit relating to voicemail technology; favorable verdict at trial; Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal.
  • Tulip Computers International B.V. v. Dell Computer Corp. (D. Del.) defended Dell in patent infringement case involving a patent directed to personal computer form factors; received summary judgment of non-infringement on half the products at issue prior to trial; case settled shortly before jury deliberation.
  • Unifi Scientific Batteries v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (E.D. Tex. and U.S.P.T.O.) represented Samsung in patent infringement action and inter partes review involving battery charging technology; granted dismissal of district court case and patent owner's disclaimer of all challenged claims in the IPR.
  • Ushijima v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (W.D. Tex.) represented Samsung in defense against allegations of patent infringement relating to liquid crystal display backlight inverter circuit technology; jury verdict of non-infringement.
  • Vanguard Products Corp. v. Parker Hannifin Corp. (D. Conn. and U.S.P.T.O.) represented Vanguard in suit against competitor for infringement of patents relating to electromagnetic interference gaskets; multimillion dollar award at jury trial and injunction granted; Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal; defended post-trial ex parte reexamination challenge by defendant.
  • Varia Holdings LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (S.D.N.Y. and U.S.P.T.O.) represented Samsung in defense of patent infringement suit relating to mobile device input technology; shortly after filing a petition for inter partes review of the patent in suit, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the district court litigation.
  • Whirlpool Corp. v. LG Electronics (I.T.C. and D. Del.) represented Whirlpool in the International Trade Commission and in the District of Delaware in a patent infringement dispute involving indoor ice making systems for refrigerators and other refrigerator technologies.