Daniel Tishman represents both plaintiffs and defendants in complex patent litigation in federal district courts, and before the International Trade Commission. Dan also has experience representing petitioners and patent owners in post-grant proceedings, and has represented clients before the U.S. Customs & Border Patrol in proceedings pursuant to 19 C.F.R. Part 177. He has represented and provided strategic counseling to clients in the consumer electronics, chemical, and automotive industries.
Dan’s broad patent litigation experience includes all phases of cases, from pre-suit investigations, fact and expert discovery, claim construction, dispositive motions, trials, and appeals. At trial, he has handled witness examination and preparation (both fact and expert witnesses). He has also taken the lead on evidentiary matters in numerous trials, including arguing evidentiary motions. Additionally, Dan has taken and defended numerous depositions (both fact and expert witnesses), argued terms at Markman hearings, and has assisted in preparing appellate briefs and arguments.
In addition to his patent litigation practice, Dan dedicates time to pro bono matters, including workplace discrimination and immigration cases.
From 2011-2013, Dan served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Yvette Kane of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Tulane University Law School 2011 J.D. Managing Editor, Tulane Law Review summa cum laude, Order of the Coif
Pennsylvania State University 2007 Information Science and Technology, B.S. cum laude
Admissions
District of Columbia 2014
Supreme Court of the United States 2017
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2016
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2018
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia 2017
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 2018
Clerkships
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, The Honorable Yvette Kane, 2011 - 2013
Memberships & Affiliations
ITC TLA, Young Lawyers Committee
Experience
Litigation Examples
Certain Subsea Telecommunication Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. 337-TA-1098 – Represented respondent NEC against complainant Xtera in multi-patent case involving subsea telecommunication systems. Case pending.
Immersion Corp. v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tx.) – Representing defendant Samsung Electronics in multi-patent infringement case involving haptics technology. Case pending.
Certain Batteries and Electrochemical Devices Containing Composite Separators, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1087 – Represented complainants LG Chem and Toray against respondent ATL in multi-patent case involving lithium ion battery technology. Favorable settlement following trial.
SEVEN Networks v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tx.) – Representing defendant Samsung Electronics in multi-patent infringement case involving consumer electronics technologies related to power usage algorithms. Case pending.
Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1042 – Represented complainants Paice and Abell against Ford in multi-patent case involving hybrid-electric vehicles. Favorable settlement following trial.
Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-998 – Represented complainants Paice and Abell against Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche in multi-patent case involving hybrid-electric vehicles. Favorable settlement.
Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Modules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-972 – Representing respondent Nautilus Hyosung against Diebold in multi-patent infringement case involving a wide array of technology associated with ATMs. Obtained finding of non-infringement as to certain products.
Paice LLC v. Hyundai Motor Co., et al. (D. Md.)(J. Garbis) – Represented Paice and Abell in multi-patent infringement case involving hybrid-electric vehicles. Favorable settlement following trial, after obtaining $28.9 million verdict and finding of willfulness for client Paice and Abell.
Certain Television Sets, Televisions Receivers, Television Tuners, and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-910 – Represented respondent LG in ITC investigation against complainant CrestaTech in multi-patent infringement case involving television tuner technology. Following trial, obtained determination of no violation.
Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (“MEMS Devices”) and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-876 – Represented respondent InvenSense against complainant STMicroelectronics in multi-patent infringement case involving MEMS technology. Favorable settlement during trial.
IMS Health Inc. v. Symphony Health Solutions, Corp. et al. (D. Del.)(J. Sleet) – Represented IMS Health in multi-patent infringement case involving healthcare analytics and informatics. Favorable settlement.
Ericsson v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tx.) – Represented defendant Samsung Electronics in multi-patent infringement case involving a wide array of consumer electronics technologies. Favorable settlement.
