Antonio Sistos is experienced in patent litigation, particularly relating to software and high tech matters. He has represented clients in several prominent commercial disputes and at all stages of litigation in both Federal District Courts and hearings before the International Trade Commission. He also regularly consults on matters before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, particular regarding the reexamination of issued patents.
- Represented Samsung, HTC, Motorola Mobility, and Google against French digital security company Gemalto. Gemalto alleged that Defendants’ Android devices infringed three of its patents directed at allowing Java-based applications to run on smart cards and microcontrollers. Headed team responsible for noninfringement and validity strategies. Clients prevailed on nearly every issue at claim construction, and subsequently won motion for summary judgment of noninfringement.
- Represented respondent HTC and third party Google in an ITC investigation (337-TA-710) initiated by Apple involving ten patents covering object-oriented operating systems, real-time processing, user interface and networking technologies. Headed team responsible for two patents regarding object-oriented operating systems. One patent was dropped prior to the hearing; the other was found not infringed and alternately invalid as obvious.
- Represented Google against non-practicing entity Bright Response in a jury trial in the Eastern District of Texas. Responsible for noninfringement and validity strategies. Jury returned a complete defense verdict of non-infringement and invalidity as to all asserted claims. The patent at issue related a method for providing automatic responses to electronic messages.
- Representing Google against non-practicing entity Paid Search Engine Tools in the Eastern District of Texas. Responsible for noninfringement and validity strategies. The Court granted Defendants’ early summary judgment of invalidity, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. The patent at issue related to a bid management system that eliminated “bid gaps.”
- Represented Google and AOL against non-practicing entity Performance Pricing the Eastern District of Texas. Responsible for noninfringement and validity strategies. The Court granted Google and AOL’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. The asserted patent related to an e-commerce method for adjusting the price of a product according to a buyer’s performance in a collateral “price determining activity.”
- Represented Google against non-practicing entity PA Advisors, LLC, in the Eastern District of Texas. Responsible for noninfringement strategies. The Court granted Google’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement as to all asserted claims. The asserted patent related to personalizing Internet search results.
- Represented Google and AOL against non-practicing entity Bid for Position in the Eastern District of Virginia. Responsible for noninfringement and validity strategies. After obtaining a favorable claim construction ruling, the Court granted Google and AOL's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of the defendants' accused Internet advertising services. Summary Judgment was subsequently upheld by the Federal Circuit. The patent at issue related to a method for automating biding in a search engine auction.
- Harvard Law School
(J.D., cum laude, 2005)- Harvard Journal of Law and Technology:
- Article Editor
- Student Writing Chair
- Harvard Journal of Law and Technology:
- Stanford University
(M.S., Industrial Engineering, 1999)
(B.S., Industrial Engineering, highest honors, 1998)- Phi Beta Kappa
- The State Bar of California
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati:
- Associate, 2005-2007
- Associate, 2005-2007
- Moonlight Systems:
- Software Designer/Engineer, 2000 - 2002
- Software Designer/Engineer, 2000 - 2002
- Third Voice Incorporated:
- Software Designer/Engineer, 1999 - 2000