Ben Thompson's practice focuses on representing clients in patent litigation, including actions filed in U.S. District Courts across the country and at the International Trade Commission. He also has experience arguing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Ben’s litigation experience includes work with varying technologies, including tunable lasers, consumer electronics, portable device power management, object-relational mapping technology, microprocessor design and operation, data aggregation software, and digital image processing technology. He also has substantial litigation experience representing clients in litigations concerning computer network security and data encryption.
In addition to Ben’s litigation work, he is a registered patent attorney who assists clients in post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Prior to entering the practice of law, Ben worked as a software developer for a company specializing in mission-critical technology solutions for the U.S. Department of Defense. Through this professional experience, and education, Ben is proficient in multiple software programming languages.
VirnetX v. Microsoft (E.D. Tex. 2013) – Counsel to Microsoft in litigation related to network communications.
Leon Stambler v. Ally Bank (E.D. Tex. 2012); Leon Stambler v. Amazon.com (E.D. Tex. 2009) – Counsel to the Federal Reserve Banks, First Citizens, Expedia, Hotels.com, Ticketmaster, and Travelocity in patent litigations related to standardized encryption protocols.
In the Matter of Certain Consumer Electronics Including Mobile Phones and Tablets, 337-TA-839 (ITC 2012) – Counsel for Samsung in ITC investigation related to mobile phones and tablets.
DataTern, Inc. v. Abbott Labs., et al. (E.D. Tex. 2011) – Counsel to Hewlett Packard in litigation concerning software for interfacing with relational databases.
DataTern, Inc. v. MicroStrategy, Inc. (D. Mass. 2011) – Counsel to defendant MicroStrategy in litigation targeting client’s business intelligence software. Obtained judgment of no-infringement in district court; currently on appeal before Federal Circuit.
Implicit Networks v. Hewlett-Packard (N.D. Cal. 2010) – Counsel to Hewlett Packard in litigation related to application server technology.
Broadcom Corp. v. Emulex Corp. (C.D. Cal. 2009) – In multi-patent litigation involving different networking technologies, won summary judgment of patent exhaustion and won jury verdict of no infringement on behalf of Emulex; currently on appeal before Federal Circuit.
TQP Development v. Barclays PLC (E.D. Tex. 2009) – Counsel to Barclays in patent litigation related to encryption algorithms employed over the Internet.
In the Matter of Certain Tunable Laser Chips, Assemblies, and Products Containing Same, 337 TA 662 (2008) – Counsel to Syntune AB and CyOptics Inc. in patent infringement investigation concerning tunable laser chips and related components.
LG Electronics v. Petters Group Worldwide, LLC, et al. (E.D. Tex. 2008) – Counsel to LG Electronics in patent infringement suit concerning flat panel television products.