Christine M. Morgan

"Morgan is sought after for her successful outcomes in both trials and settlements involving tech patents."
Legal 500 USA, Intellectual Property: Patents: litigation (full coverage)

Chris is an intellectual property and complex commercial trial lawyer in our San Francisco office with repeated successes for companies accused of infringing computer hardware and software patents. She has achieved cost-effective wins for clients in several industries, including video game publishing, fintech, ride sharing, consumer hardware and electronics, Wi-Fi semiconductors, mobile printers, health care software and hardware, wireless security cameras, Bluetooth-enabled tracking devices, cloud content management, and electronic loyalty programs.

Where cases cannot be resolved short of trial, Chris tries them. Chris has tried patent cases in the country’s most active patent litigation venues, including the Eastern District of Texas, the Northern District of California, the Eastern District of Virginia, the International Trade Commission, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, serving as first chair in two of these trials.

Among her trials of note is Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. LSI Corporation, et al. (N.D. Cal. 2014), where Chris presented the sole company witness for Realtek at trial, and the jury awarded $3.8 million based on his testimony. This case resulted in the first U.S. jury verdict to set a reasonable and nondiscriminatory (RAND) royalty rate for declared standard essential patents (SEPs), believed then to be the lowest such rate for a Wi-Fi declared SEP. Chris was also on the trial and appellate teams in Ericsson v. D-Link, et al. (E.D. Tex. 2013), which resulted in the seminal Federal Circuit opinion on RAND damages, Ericsson v. D-Link, 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014), and a complete victory for the defendants after appeal and a parallel inter partes review proceeding wiped out the remaining patents.

Chris also specializes in the Section 101 patent defense. She has eliminated tens of millions of dollars in potential damages exposure faced by our clients by invalidating patents under Section 101, often at the pleading stage. Recent victories include MIAX v. Nasdaq, CBM2018-00030, 00032, where Chris argued as lead trial counsel for MIAX, invalidating two Nasdaq electronic trading patents that were asserted against MIAX in parallel district court litigation. Chris also invalidated a patent under Section 101 related to collecting data from bedside machines, converting it, and presenting it on a graphical user interface and obtained affirmance of that result in University of Florida Research Foundation v. General Electric Co., 916 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2019), an opinion that Law360 dubbed one of the Federal Circuit’s “most significant patent rulings since the beginning of 2019.”

Chris’ Section 101 motion to dismiss wins also include invalidating a patent that had survived IPR and that focused on verifying the identity of a user in more than one way over multiple communications mediums in Smart Authentication IP, LLC v. Electronic Arts Inc., 2019 WL 4305556 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 11, 2019). She also invalidated two patents focused on wirelessly outputting data from one device to another that had been asserted in over two dozen cases around the country in Pebble Tide LLC v. Arlo Technologies, Inc., 2020 WL 509183 (D. Del. Jan. 31, 2020). Most recently, Chris invalidated two patents relating to hospital bed graphical user interfaces in Allen Medical Systems Inc., et al. v. Mizuho Orthopedic Systems, Inc., Case No. 22-cv-02462-YGR, Dkt. 53 (N.D. Cal. July 5, 2022).

While her practice focuses on patent litigation, Chris also routinely handles trade secret, unfair competition, trademark, copyright, and complex commercial disputes. Chris’ trial experience even extends to criminal matters.

Chris is also deeply committed to the advancement of women and serves as the Chair of Reed Smith’s Women’s Initiative Network in San Francisco.

Experience

Representative matters

University of Florida Research Foundation v. General Electric Company, 916 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2019): Chris successfully briefed and argued section 101 invalidity of the patent asserted in this case against GE, then briefed the issue in a winning appellate brief. Law 360 named this decision as one of the Federal Circuit’s “most significant patent rulings since the beginning of 2019.”

Pebble Tide LLC v. Arlo Technologies, Inc., 2020 WL 509183 (D. Del. Jan. 31, 2020). Successfully briefed and argued the section 101 invalidity of two patents directed to wirelessly outputting data from one device to another. Patents had been asserted in over two dozen cases around the United States. Matter on appeal.

Smart Authentication IP, LLC v. Electronic Arts Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2019): Defended EA against allegations of infringement of a patent involving user authentication. Invalidated asserted claim (which had survived IPR) on Rule 12(b)(6) motion under Alice.

MIAX v. Nasdaq, CBM2018-00030, 00032: Prevailed as lead trial counsel representing MIAX in Covered Business Method Review proceedings at Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Invalidated two Nasdaq patents under section 101.

Rothschild Broadcast Distribution Systems, LLC v. Arlo Technologies, Inc. (D. Del. 2019): Obtained dismissal after suggesting Reed Smith team would prevail on 12(b)(6) motion to invalidate patent under section 101 of the patent code.

Encoditech LLC v. Honeywell International, Inc. (D. Del. 2020): Obtained dismissal with prejudice for no payment by Honeywell after serving Rule 11 letter on plaintiff demonstrating its case lacked merit.

Encoditech LLC v. Tile, Inc. (D. Del. 2019): Obtained dismissal for no payment by Tile after serving Rule 11 letter on plaintiff demonstrating its case lacked merit.

Stone Interactive Ventures LLC v. Electronic Arts Inc. (WDTX): Defending patent infringement claims. Case ongoing.

Blackbird Tech LLC v. Uber Technologies Inc. (D. Del. 2016): Obtained dismissal for no payment by Uber after serving Rule 11 motion demonstrating plaintiff’s case lacked merit.

Open Text S.A. v. Box, Inc., (N.D. Cal 2015) Chris authored the winning section 101 brief in this case, invalidating five “groupware” patents that formed the basis for much of the $270M in damages asserted by Open Text. After the trial team prevailed on a summary judgment of no willfulness and a motion to strike plaintiff’s damages expert, the case went to trial. After a 2-week jury trial, the jury awarded plaintiff less than 2% of its original damages claim. Case settled on appeal.

Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. LSI Corp., et al., No. CV 12-3451 RMW (N.D. Cal.). Trial counsel for Realtek Semiconductor Corporation in in first U.S. trial in which jurors were asked to decide the licensing terms for declared Standard Essential patents. LSI previously committed to license two patents declared essential to IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi standards under reasonable and nondiscriminatory (RAND) terms. On summary judgment, Judge Ronald Whyte found LSI to have breached that commitment by suing Realtek in the International Trade Commission (ITC) for patent infringement without first making a RAND offer. Following a two-week trial in 2014, the jury set a RAND rate believed to be the lowest ever to be set for comparable technologies related to declared standard essential patents. The jury also awarded Realtek $3.8 million in attorney’s fees incurred in defending the ITC proceeding initiated by LSI.

Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Safeway, Inc., No. 12-cv-800 (E.D. Tex.). Invalidated patent to computerized incentive program on summary judgment under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, and 103.

CSIRO v. Real Communications, Inc., No. 6:12-cv-842 (LED) (E.D. Tex.). Obtained complete dismissal of Real Communications, Inc. after motion practice, in case alleging infringement of patent declared essential to 802.11 WiFi standards.

Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems, Inc., No. 2013-1625 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Trial counsel for Wi-Fi router and laptop marketers sued on cell technology patents alleged to be essential to the Wi-Fi standard. Obtained reversal of patent infringement and RAND damages award due to lack of substantial evidence and erroneous jury instruction. Case administratively closed after finding by patent office that patents to be retried are invalid.

In the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuit Chips and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-859 (International Trade Commission). Trial counsel for Realtek Semiconductor Corporation in ITC hearing involving products of LSI Corporation and Seagate Technology alleged to infringe patent involving packaging and analog circuitry.

Seiko Epson v. Multi-Union (D. Or.). Represented defendants in patent infringement action relating to ink jet printer cartridge technology. Matter settled favorably on eve of trial.

Baffa v. Christian Broadcasting Network (N.D.Cal.) Represented defendant in copyright and trademark infringement action related to a 700 Club episode. Obtained dismissal after filing 12(b)(6) motion.

14 Crow Canyon, et al. v. Page Mill Properties, et al. Second-chaired three-week arbitral hearing arising out of claims for securities fraud brought by 20 investors after failure of a $350 million real estate investment in East Palo Alto, California. Won complete defense award for Reed Smith clients, which was thereafter judicially confirmed.

Electronics and Telecommunication Research Institute of Korea v. Qualcomm (ICC arbitration) Represented claimant, a Korean research institute, in action concerning joint development agreement relating to CDMA technology. Obtained favorable arbitration award totaling more than $200 million.

Sinh v. Banks (San Francisco Superior Court) Second-chaired jury trial in case involving breach of contract to sell hotel, resulting in seven-figure verdict for client.

Recognitions

Selected to the IAM Patent 1000, which identifies the top patent practitioners throughout the world, 2023-2025
Named by the Daily Journal as one of the Top Intellectual Property Lawyers in California, 2022
Named to the Daily Journal’s annual list of the Top Women Lawyers in California, 2021