An exceptionally accomplished litigator, Ryan O’Connor represents industry-leading companies and global brands across industries in patent disputes in U.S. District Courts, U.S. International Trade Commission proceedings, and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office proceedings.

Ryan represents many of the world’s best-known companies in contentious multi-patent disputes, both asserting and defending their intellectual property rights. Among his many clients are Intuitive Surgical, Samsung, Microsoft, GSK, and Gilead.

Ryan focuses on litigating patent infringement disputes involving pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, and computer hardware and software. From pre-litigation diligence through litigation, he deftly manages case assessment, electronic document collection and production, fact and expert discovery, settlement strategy, and trial work. While Ryan focuses his practice in U.S. District Courts and has appeared in them across the country, he also has successfully handled numerous ITC investigations and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office post-grant proceedings.

Before joining Fish, Ryan investigated novel antibiotics as a biochemist at Replidyne. He assisted pharmaceutical, biotech, and medical device companies with product development as a regulatory consultant at CBR International and worked on manufacturing processes used to create x-ray film and various coatings as an engineer at Kodak and Valspar, respectively. He also researched over-expression of recombinant DNA in E. coli at the University of Colorado.


U.S. District Court cases

Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) (counsel for Amazon, Zappos, Sears, Kmart, Lands’ End, and Netflix in multi-patent litigation involving various e-commerce related technologies)

ARIES Associates v. L-3 Communications, Inc., et. al. (C.D. Cal.) (counsel for L-3 Communications in trade secret litigation involving decontamination technology for chemical and biological weapons)

ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. and ASUS Computer International v. IBM (N.D. Cal.) (counsel for ASUS in patent litigation concerning products implementing power supplies, variable speed fans, and Network Address Port Translation; successfully obtained stay of case after a year into litigation, and case subsequently settled favorably)

Corning Inc. v. DSM Desotech, Inc. (D. Del.) (counsel for Corning in litigation over fiber optic coatings)

Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.) (counsel for Google in multi-patent litigation involving internet advertising technology; 4 parallel inter partes reexaminations)

Geomembrane Technologies Inc v. R P S Engineering Corp et al, (C.D. Cal.) (counsel for URS Corp. in patent litigation concerning clarifier covers for water treatment reservoirs)

Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. AbbVie (D. Del.) (counsel for Gilead in litigation over its hepatitis C treatment Harvoni®)

GSK v Teva; GSK v Glenmark (D. Del.) (counsel for plaintiffs in patent litigation over heart-failure medication Coreg®)

Network Signatures, Inc. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., (C.D. Cal.) (counsel for Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. in patent litigation concerning SSL technology)

St. Jude Medical v. Volcano Corp. (D. Del.) (defended Volcano against St. Jude’s assertion of a patent related to cardiac guidewire consoles; case resulted in settlement favorable to client)

Walker Digital, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al. (D. Del.) (counsel for Microsoft in multi-patent litigation involving various internet advertising and automated bidding technologies)

Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., (S.D. Cal.) (counsel for NuVasive in patent litigation and parallel inter partes reexaminations concerning spinal implant technology)

U.S. International Trade Commission proceedings

ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. and ASUS Computer International v. IBM (337-TA-628) (counsel for ASUS in patent litigation concerning products implementing power supplies, variable speed fans, and Network Address Port Translation; win at trial and initial determination, Commission decided not to review initial determination which became the final determination, and case subsequently settled favorably.)

DSM v. Momentive and OFS Fitel (337-TA-1031) (counsel for Momentive in patent litigation concerning coatings for optical fibers, coated optical fibers, and products containing same)

Renesas Technology Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Dynamic Random Access Memory Devices and Products Containing Same (337-TA-595) (counsel for Samsung in patent litigation concerning on-die termination and driver circuits for DDR2 SDRAM memory devices and phase-shift masks allegedly used in the fabrication of DDR1 and DDR2 SDRAM memory devices; Staff concurred with non-infringement and invalidity of asserted patents; settled favorably two days before the initial determination issued).

Pro bono activities

  • Law Firm Anti-Racism Alliance
  • San Diego Volunteer Lawyers Program – Eviction Notice Clinic
  • Nnegest Likké v. Kristi Kilday et al. (Cal.) – Represented Ms. Likké, an independent filmmaker, in litigation involving fraudulent or intentional misrepresentations, promissory estoppel, Business and Profession Code Section 17200 and 17500, and negligent hiring, supervision, and/or retention of employees