Tommy Martin

Partner

[email protected]

Washington, D.C.

P: +1.202.639.7752
F: +1.202.585.4093
Tommy Martin

Tommy Martin's practice centers around complex patent and trade secret litigation before the International Trade Commission (ITC), U.S district courts, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Mr. Martin represents clients in all phases of pre-trial, trial, post-trial and appeal, as well as before U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Mr. Martin also represents clients in seller disputes before Amazon.com. His experience in this regard includes initiating and responding to take-down requests under Amazon.com’s Utility Patent Neutral Evaluation (UPNE) process, as well as Amazon.com’s Brand Registry infringement reporting process.

Mr. Martin is a registered patent attorney that has counseled clients in all phases of patent prosecution, including post-grant prosecution before the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB).

Mr. Martin has drafted, filed, and prosecuted hundreds of patent applications in a diverse field of technologies.

In addition, Mr. Martin counsels clients on patent portfolio development, management, and enforcement. This includes counseling emerging tech companies at all stages of funding and development.

Through his intellectual property practice, Mr. Martin has gained significant knowledge and experience in the fields of alternative energy, computer hardware and software, telecommunications, life sciences, and complex machinery.

Mr. Martin's pro bono practice includes representing under served individuals with child custody and landlord-tenant matters in the District of Columbia Courts, and immigration matters in U.S. Immigration Courts.

Prior to attending law school, Mr. Martin worked as a Mechanical Engineer for the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. He served as a lead engineer on aircraft carrier overhaul projects with a particular focus on steam and hydraulic power in aircraft launch and recovery systems.

Related Experience

  • Diogenes Limited & Colossus (IOM) Ltd. v. DraftKings Inc. (D. Del.) – Representing defendant in eight-patent infringement litigation involving features of online gaming
  • Certain Video Security Equipment and Systems, Related Software, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1281) – Representing complainant in multi-patent Section 337 investigation before the ITC concerning smart video analytics
  • E-Z Ink, Inc. et al v. Brother Industries, Ltd. (E.D. Va.) – Representing respondent in declaratory judgment litigation in the Eastern District of Virginia concerning toner cartridge technologies
  • Chu v. Universal Air Conditioner Inc. (E.D. Tex.) – Representing respondent in design patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas concerning automotive air compressors
  • Certain Fitness Devices, Streaming Components Thereof, and Systems Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1265) – Representing complainant in multi-patent Section 337 investigation before the ITC concerning adaptive bitrate streaming technology
  • Certain Artificial Eyelash Extension Systems, Products, and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1226) – Representing defendant in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning false eyelash technologies
  • Certain Chemical Mechanical Planarization Slurries and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1204) – Representing complainant in 337 investigation before the ITC concerning semiconductor manufacturing technologies
  • Certain High-Density Fiber Optic Equipment and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1194) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning fiber optic technologies
  • Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1174) – Represented complainant in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning toner cartridge technologies
  • Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing Same (II) (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1076) – Represented complainant in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning magnetic tape data storage technologies
  • Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1058) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning magnetic tape data storage technologies
  • Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1036) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning magnetic tape data storage technologies
  • Certain Flash Memory Devices and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1034) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning power consumption and data addressing in flash memory devices
  • Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use with Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1032) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning DNA sequencing technology
  • Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1012) – Represented complainant in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning magnetic tape data storage technologies
  • Brother Industries, Ltd. et al v. Linkyo Corp. (C.D. Ca.) – Represented complainant in declaratory judgment litigation in the Central District of California concerning toner cartridge technologies
  • Milestone IP LLC v. Capital One, National Association (W.D. Tex.) – Represented defendant in patent infringement litigation in the Western District of Texas concerning electronic banking technology
  • Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (N.D. Ca.) – Represented defendant in patent infringement litigation in the Northern District of California concerning telecommunications technology
  • Zix Corporation v. Echoworx Corporation (E.D. Tex. / N.D. Tex.) – Represented plaintiff in patent infringement litigation in the Eastern and Northern Districts of Texas concerning data encryption technology
  • Ultratec, Inc. et al. v. Sorenson Communications, Inc. et al. (W.D. Wis.) – Represented defendants in multi-patent infringement litigation in the Western District of Wisconsin, and as a petitioner in inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial an Appeals Board, concerning captioned telephone technology
  • Certain Electronic Products, Including Products With Near Field Communication (“NFC”) System Level Functionality and/or Battery Power-Up Functionality, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1058) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning NFC technology and battery technology
  • Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-887) – Represented complainant in multi-patent and trade secret 337 investigation before the ITC concerning variable position counterweight technology
  • Protegrity Corp. v. Safenet, Inc. (D. Conn.) – Represented defendant in patent infringement litigation in the District of Connecticut concerning data encryption technology
  • LG Electronics v. ASKO Appliances, Inc. et al. (D. Del.) – Represented defendants in multi-patent infringement litigation in the District of Delaware concerning washing machine direct-drive technology
  • Certain LED Photographic Lighting Devices and Components Thereof (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-804) – Represented four of the named respondents in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning LED lighting technology
  • Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same (ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-803) – Represented respondent in multi-patent 337 investigation before the ITC concerning DRAM memory technology
  • Greenkeepers of Delaware, LLC/Greenkeepers, Inc. v. Taylor Made Golf Co., Inc. et al. (E.D. Pa.) – Represented plaintiff in patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concerning outwardly angled golf cleats
  • Nexans Inc. v. General Cable Corp. (E.D. Pa.) – Represented defendant and counter claimant in patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concerning defendant's patents directed to paired electrical cables

Awards & Community

Recognized as a Washington D.C. Super Lawyer-Rising Star, 2014-2017

News

results Page of

Thought Leadership

results Page of