Christopher J. Tyson

Partner

  • Christopher J. Tyson
  • Phone: +1 202 776 7851

    Christopher J. Tyson - LinkedIn Import to Address Book

  • Duane Morris LLP
    901 New York Avenue N.W., Suite 700 East
    Washington, DC 20001-4795
    USA

Christopher J. Tyson is a former U.S. Navy nuclear engineer, now registered patent attorney, with over sixteen years of experience handling complex IP litigation, transactional matters, and prosecution matters for clients ranging from some of the world’s largest technology companies to startup companies and individual inventors. Most recently, Chris was part of a Duane Morris trial team that secured what has been described as the largest defense victory in the history of patent litigation, a complete win (on non-infringement) in a multi-billion dollar patent infringement bench retrial in the Eastern District of Virginia’s rocket docket.

Chris’s current practice is primarily in patent litigation matters before federal courts throughout the country, including in Texas, Delaware and California, and in post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In patent litigation matters, Chris leads the technical team responsible for distilling down the merits and strategies of the infringement and validity aspects of the case, as well as for interfacing with client engineers and technical experts, and overseeing substantive discovery. Chris also regularly argues at claim construction (Markman) and dispositive motion hearings at the district court level, and has argued several appeals at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In PTAB post-grant proceedings, Chris serves as lead counsel, from drafting the initial petitions through arguing in final Trial hearings, and is a valued contributor to the firm’s PTAB practice group that is consistently ranked as the best in the country at representing petitioners in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. See Unified Patents’ institutional success index (2018-2023).

In addition to his litigation and PTAB practice, Chris prosecutes patent and trademark applications before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, counsels clients on the development, commercialization and licensing of their intellectual property, and drafts and negotiates patent, trademark, software and know how license agreements.

Chris is also widely recognized as a staunch advocate for U.S. military veterans, and has more than a decade of experience representing clients pro bono before the U.S. Court of Appeals of Veterans Claims, Board of Veterans Appeals, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and branch-specific Discharge Review Boards and Boards of Correction for Military Records. Chris also serves as a firm-wide mentor to attorneys representing U.S. military veteran clients in cases before these courts and agencies, and as a mentoring attorney to junior attorneys of The Veterans Consortium’s National Volunteer Corps.

Prior to his legal career, Chris served for over eight years as an officer in the U.S. Navy, where he managed the operation and maintenance of nuclear power plants in a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, including electrical power generation and distribution, and mechanical and propulsion plant systems, and was qualified as a nuclear engineering officer.

Chris is a 2010 graduate of George Mason University School of Law, Virginia (Juris Doctorate), a 2007 graduate of Old Dominion University, Virginia (Master of Engineering Management), and a 1999 graduate of the United States Naval Academy (Bachelor of Science, Ocean Engineering).

Representative Matters

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Post-Grant Proceedings

  • Lead counsel for petitioner Cisco in Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc., IPR2018-01436, -01437, -01760. Successfully challenged three patents directed to network packet filtering and network threat detection. Argued final trial hearing for the three IPRs. The PTAB found in favor of petitioner, holding the challenged claims unpatentable. Led briefing on appeal to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the PTAB’s findings without oral argument. 847 F. App’x. 869 (2021); 847 F. App’x 881 (2021). The Supreme Court denied the patent owner’s petition for certiorari.

  • Lead counsel for petitioner Ruckus Wireless, Inc. in IPRs challenging the validity of patents held by Hera Wireless S.A. directed to wireless Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) technology. IPR2018-01418, -01419, -01420, -01421, -01732, -01739. Argued final trial hearing for the six IPRs. The PTAB found in favor of petitioner, holding all challenged claims unpatentable and denying the patent owner’s motions to amend. The patent owner voluntarily dismissed its appeals prior to briefing.
  • Successfully represented petitioners Ruckus Wireless, Inc. and NETGEAR, Inc. in IPRs challenging the validity of four patents held by ChriMar Systems, Inc. directed to network management of Ethernet equipment. IPR2016-01389, -01391, -01397, -01399. The PTAB found in favor of petitioners, holding all challenged claims unpatentable, which was affirmed on appeal by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court denied the patent owner’s petition for certiorari.
  • Lead counsel for petitioners WideOpenWest Finance, LLC and Knology of Florida, Inc. in IPRs challenging the validity of three patents held by Focal IP, LLC directed to voice communications between circuit-switched networks and packet-switched networks. IPR2016-01259, -01261, -01262, -01263. Argued final trial hearing for the four IPRs. The PTAB found in favor of petitioners, holding all challenged claims unpatentable. Argued appeal at the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the PTAB’s findings.
  • Successfully represented petitioner PeroxyChem LLC in the second-ever-filed post-grant review (PGR) petition, which challenged the validity of a patent held by Innovative Environmental Technologies, Inc. directed to the oxidation and biological attenuation of organic compounds in soil and groundwater. PGR2016-00002. The parties settled their disputes after the PTAB instituted the PGR.
  • Successfully represented petitioner Electronic Arts Inc. in IPRs challenging the validity of two patents held by White Knuckle Gaming, LLC directed to updating video game parameters over a network. IPR2015-01595, IPR2016-00634. The PTAB found in favor of petitioner, holding all challenged claims unpatentable, and the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s findings on appeal.

    • Patent Litigation

  • Obtained pre-discovery, voluntary dismissal with prejudice by the plaintiff of its patent infringement lawsuit against a wireless infrastructure provider client, and in return for no payment by the client.

  • Represented Fortune 100 retailer in multiple patent litigation matters related to Bluetooth technology in the Western District of Texas that respectively resulted in a voluntary dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims, and a resolution through settlement.

  • Represented two leading security software companies in patent infringement cases brought by the same plaintiff in the Eastern District of Texas, and that were resolved through favorable settlements for the clients.

  • Successfully defended a Fortune 25 telecommunications company in a patent infringement case in the Northern District of Texas in which summary judgment on a license defense was obtained and affirmed on appeal to the Federal Circuit.

  • Won dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, which invalidated the patent-in-suit, on behalf of a leading U.S. video game developer and publisher in the District of Utah. The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment on appeal.

  • Obtained favorable settlement for Cisco, Meraki, and Aruba defendants in the District of Delaware in a patent infringement suit involving technology for seamless user mobility among WiFi access points in a wireless networking environment.

  • Obtained early, no-payment settlement of a patent infringement suit in the Western District of Michigan for a premium custom cabinetry design and distribution company after uncovering, and revealing to the Court at a Case Management Conference, the plaintiff’s own invalidating prior art that it withheld from the U.S. Patent Office.

    • Trade Secret Litigation

  • Instrumental member of trial team that successfully defended a biomedical device start-up company client in bet-the-company trade secret litigation in New Jersey Superior Court.

    • International IP Litigation

  • Cisco Systems GmbH v. ReefEdge Networks Deutschland GmbH (Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany); related opposition proceedings in European Patent Office, related cancellation proceeding in German Patent Office. With German counsel, representing Cisco in defense of patent infringement proceedings and prosecution of opposition proceedings challenging the validity of the European Patents, and prosecution of a cancellation proceeding challenging the validity of a German utility model, that are the subject of a co-pending infringement action against Cisco in Germany.
  • ReefEdge Networks Deutschland GmbH v. Cisco Systems GmbH (District of Dusseldorf, Germany); related nullity action in Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany. Partnered with German counsel, represented Cisco in defense of infringement proceedings and prosecution of nullity action running in parallel with co-pending U.S. litigation. The patent-in-suit concerned technology for seamless mobility among WiFi wireless access points.

Admissions

  • Virginia
  • Washington, D.C.
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

Education

  • George Mason University Antonin Scalia School of Law, J.D., 2010
  • Old Dominion University, M.S., Engineering Management, 2007
  • United States Naval Academy, B.S., 1999

Experience

  • Duane Morris LLP
    - Partner, 2018-present
    - Associate, 2011-2017
    - Patent Agent, 2007-2011

  • U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer (Nuclear), 1999-2007

Professional Activities

  • DC Bar Association
  • Virginia Bar Association
    - Intellectual Property Law Section
  • Veterans Legal Assistance Project
    - Active Firm Liaison
  • Capital Area Veterans Collaborative

Honors and Awards

  • Recipient, The Veterans Consortium’s Chairman’s Award (November 15, 2023)
  • Recipient, 11th Annual Duane Morris Pro Bono Award (2017)
  • Named as The Veterans Consortium's 2nd Quarter 2017 VIP (Volunteer Inspiring Pro Bono)
  • Listed in Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers' Rising Stars
  • Recognized by D.C. Mayor's Office of Veterans Affairs for Exemplary Achievements, Leadership, and Commitment to the Veteran Community in DC (2016)

Selected Publications

Selected Speaking Engagements

  • Co-presenter, “Advanced Veterans Topics: Ethics, Cultural Competency and VA Legal Updates”, November 28, 2018

  • Presenter, “Emerging Legal Issues and Strategies in Post-Grant Proceedings at PTAB”, Austin IP Inn of Court, October 18, 2018

  • Co-presenter, “GDPR: Facts vs. Fiction”, CTI Meeting Technology Lunch Forum, October 9, 2018

  • Panelist, “Pro Bono in Big Law,” Georgetown Law Center, April 3, 2018

  • Panelist, "Advocating for Social Justice Through Pro Bono," Washington Council of Lawyers, October 26, 2017
  • Panelist, "Social Justice," Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC, October 4, 2017
  • "Strategy for Motions to Exclude, Motions to Strike and Reply Briefs before PTAB," PTAB Practice Group, September 2017
  • "Adverse Judgment and Estoppel", PTAB Practice Group, June 2015
  • "Veterans Cultural Competency: Military Veterans in the Workplace", March 2016
  • "Impact of Nike v. Adidas Federal Circuit Decision", PTAB Practice Group, March 2016
  • "Impact of Dynamic Drinkware v. National Graphics Federal Circuit Decision", PTAB Practice Group, September 2015
  • "Potential Pitfalls with 102(e) Post-Grant Challenges," PTAB Practice Group, May 2015