Described in IAM Magazine as the “last man standing in infringement duels in jurisdictions nationwide,” Tom Reger argues patent and other intellectual property cases in U.S. district and state courts, as well as the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). With this litigation experience representing defendants and plaintiffs, Tom leads all aspects of the case, from the complaint through hearings through trial. Successfully representing defendants in U.S. districts across the country, Tom has won summary judgments of invalidity and patent exhaustion, obtained jury verdicts of non-infringement, and been awarded fees under Section 285. And in representing plaintiffs, he has won verdicts of infringement, breach of contract, and enhanced damages. At the ITC, Tom has successfully defeated asserted patents before the ALJ and the Commission by presenting non-infringement, invalidity, domestic industry, and other defenses at the evidentiary hearing. Across these cases, Tom often litigated standard essential patents and FRAND issues for many technologies, including telecom, WiFi, semiconductors, and others.
Tom also participated in the Lawyer on Loan program through the Dallas County District Attorney’s office. During his tenure as an assistant district attorney, he prosecuted more than 15 jury trials.
In addition to his litigation experience, Tom used his computer science degree from Texas A&M as a patent prosecutor and as a software engineer. His particular focus was in algorithm analysis, optimization, and other software design. He is well-versed in many computer languages (including Java, C, C++, SQL, HTML, COBOL, and Assembler), as well as operating systems, hardware platforms, and databases.
Tom was commissioned as officer in the U.S. Army Reserves in December 1995. He has been married to Nicole Reger for 20 years, and they have two children.
- “Current and Recurrent Ethical Issues in Intellectual Property Practice” University of Texas’ 10th Annual Intellectual Property Symposium (2009)
Case Name Confidential (ITC) – Represented a Fortune 10 consumer electronics company in multi-jurisdictional dispute involving operating system, radio, touchscreen, and battery technologies with a focus on public interest factors and domestic industry at the ITC hearing.
In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof (337-862) and Ericsson Inc. et al v. Samsung Electronics Co. et al (Case Nos. 894 and 895) (E.D. Tex. 2012) – Represented Samsung in multi-jurisdictional dispute involving cellular and wireless networking technology with a focus on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) obligations and public interest factors at the ITC hearing.
In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof (337-703) and Research In Motion v. Eastman Kodak (N.D. Tex. 2008) – Represented RIM in multi-jurisdictional dispute, including i) Respondent in ITC investigation where 2 ALJs and the Commission invalidated Kodak’s asserted patent involving camera technology and ii) as a declaratory judgment Plaintiff in a multi-patent infringement action related to camera technology and data integration technology.
Semcon v. Texas Instruments (E.D. Tex. 2016) – Lead counsel for TI in 5-patent lawsuit involving power management and direct memory access (DMA) technologies, including arguing all dispositive terms for joint defense group at Markman hearing.
DeepNines Inc. v. McAfee Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2006) – Represented Plaintiff DeepNines on patent involving network security; obtained a jury verdict of $18M on willful infringement (both direct and indirect), as well as false marking.
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.
NXP v. BlackBerry et al. (M.D. Fla. 2012) – Represented Defendant BlackBerry (formerly RIM) against six asserted patents involving various technologies, including computer buses, WiFi, and semiconductor manufacturing; argued the Markman hearing that ultimately resulted in three dropped patents and a jury verdict of no infringement, and invalidity of the three remaining patents. The Patent Office subsequently invalidated two of the plaintiff’s patents after inter partes review (IPR).
Touchcom Technologies Inc v. Dresser, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2005) – Obtained summary judgment of patent invalidity for Dresser in software patent infringement suit with damages alleged to exceed $30M.
Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v. T-Mobile US, Inc. and T-Mobile USA, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016) Filed a series of 4 related cases concerning T-Mobile’s infringement of 14 standard essential patents (or SEPs) related to 3GPP/LTE standards for core network equipment, as well as a declaratory judgment case regarding FRAND licensing obligations.
Nokia Solutions and Networks US LLC and Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. and Huawei Device USA, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016) After successfully obtaining an order severing Nokia’s counterclaims from another series of cases, defended Huawei in a series of 4 related lawsuits brought by Nokia alleging infringement of 9 patents concerning 3GPP/LTE standards for cellphones and tablets.
In the Matter of Certain Non-Volatile Memory Chips and Products Containing the Same (337-916) and In the Matter of Certain Devices Containing Non-Volatile Memory (337-922) – Represented Macronix as Respondent and Complainant, respectively, in investigations concerning non-volatile memory, such as Flash memory.
TronTech Licensing Incorporated v. Uniden America Corporation (E.D. Tex. 2006) – After invalidating 8 claims based on indefiniteness at Markman hearing, obtained favorable settlement for Uniden in patent infringement suit involving cordless telephone answering machine technology.
Cheetah Omni LLC v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex. 2011) – Obtained favorable settlement for Huawei in multi-patent litigation involving optical networking components.
Alcatel USA Sourcing, Inc v. Microsoft Corporation (E.D. Tex. 2006) – Represented Microsoft in multi-patent litigation involving image and video processing.
DataTern, Inc. v. Avis Budget Group, Inc. and Hertz Corporation (E.D. Tex. 2009), DataTern, Inc. v. The Allstate Corporation et al. (E.D. Tex. 2009), DataTern, Inc. v. Suntrust Banks, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex. 2010) – Represented Halliburton, Avis Budget, Hertz, and ConocoPhillips in patent infringement suits concerning middleware software that facilitates communication between an object oriented program and a relational database.
Summit 6 LLC v. Research In Motion (N.D. Tex. 2011) – Represented RIM in a patent infringement action related to web-based media submission tools; obtained favorable settlement after Markman ruling.
SaniJet Corp. v. BeautyMall Ltd. et al. (N.D. Tex. 2006) – Argued Markman hearing before Judge Furgeson and obtained favorable settlement for Beauty Mall in patent infringement litigation involving pipeless spa jet technology.
Landmark Graphics Corp. et al. v. Paradigm Geophysical Corp. et al. (S.D. Tex. 2006) – Obtained favorable settlement for Plaintiffs in patent infringement litigation involving 3D seismic imaging, while defending against breach of contract, trade secret, and other counterclaims.
Choicepoint Public Records v. Seisint et al. (Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County 2002) – Represented Seisint against breach of contract, trade secret, and other allegations involving data brokerage software and related data.
Blumenau v. Avid Technology, Inc. (N.D. Tex. 2007) – Obtained favorable settlement for Avid Technology in patent infringement litigation involving audiovisual data editing environment manipulating symbols or icons representing individual transformation processes.
- Selected by peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America (2022-2023)
- Named by IAM Patent 1000: The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners as one of the “top patent practitioners” in Texas for litigation in (2012-2017)
- Named a “Texas Rising Star” by Super Lawyers (2005-2006, 2010-2013)
- Fellow in the Texas Bar Foundation
J.D., Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law (2001) Member, SMU Law Review
B.S., Computer Science, Texas A&M University (1995)
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 2001
- Texas 2001
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 2005
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas 2002
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas 2006
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas 2009
ITC Trial Lawyers Association
Member of The Honorable Barbara M.G. Lynn American Inn of Court
August 22, 2022
96 Fish Attorneys Included in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America
July 13, 2022
ITC Affirms Favorable Outcome for Fish & Richardson Client Quectel
April 20, 2022
Fish & Richardson Obtains Favorable Initial Determination at ITC for Client Quectel
August 19, 2021
Fish Attorneys Recognized in 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America
August 15, 2018
47 Fish Attorneys Named to The Best Lawyers in America® 2019 List
July 24, 2017
Fish & Richardson Receives Top “Gold” Ranking from IAM Patent 1000 for National Patent Litigation Practice
June 15, 2016
Fish & Richardson Named to IAM Patent 1000 for National Patent Litigation and Prosecution Practices