![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Alexander Rudis
New York Office Tel: 212-849-7000 Fax: 212-849-7100 alexanderrudis@quinnemanuel.com Practice Areas Antitrust and Trade Regulation Intellectual Property Litigation Education
St. John's University School Of Law (J.D., cum laude, 2003)
Bucknell University (B.S., Electrical Engineering, 2000) |
Biography
Alexander Rudis is a partner in Quinn Emanuel's New York office. His civil trial practice focuses on intellectual property matters with a particular emphasis on patent litigation. He has extensive experience building cases in highly technical subject matter for both plaintiffs and defendants. His practice encompasses all aspects of case preparation, pre-trial discovery, expert preparation, trial preparation and trial.
Based on his electrical engineering degree, Mr. Rudis has represented clients involved in a variety of complex technologies, including mainframe computer software, hardware, and architectures, cell phone technologies, wireless local area networks, voice encryption, video compression, casino gaming hardware and software, and global positioning systems. Mr. Rudis has litigated in jurisdictions throughout the country, including the Southern District of New York, the Eastern District of Texas, the Northern District of California, the Eastern District of Virginia, the District of Delaware, the Western District of Wisconsin, the Southern District of Florida, and the International Trade Commission. Notable Representations
Counsel for Motorola Mobility in a multi-district patent dispute between Motorola Mobility and Apple, Inc.
Counsel for defendants Sony and Sony Ericsson in a series of patent cases involving 3G cell phone technology.
Counsel for defendant Bally Technologies in a patent case involving casino and slot management systems.
Represented IBM in a complex patent and antitrust action in the Southern District of New York relating to IBM’s flagship System z mainframe computers. District court granted summary judgment in favor of IBM.
Represented Google in patent infringement case involving its online advertising technology. After a one-week trial, the jury returned a verdict of noninfringement and invalidity.
Represented Motorola in a multi-billion dollar trade secret case that resulted in favorable settlement for Motorola. |
|