Sam Stake is a partner in Quinn Emanuel’s San Francisco office. He co-founded Quinn Emanuel’s AI practice group and continues to co-lead it.
He represents clients in intellectual property and complex commercial disputes. Over nearly two decades, he has advised companies, founders, inventors, and investors in patent, trade secret, antitrust, copyright, and contract disputes.
Sam has particular experience with AI, semiconductors and data centers, robotics, wireless communications systems, cybersecurity, biotech, genetics, medical devices, and pharmaceuticals.
His trial and litigation results include:
- Securing a $174.5 million jury verdict and running royalty for Voxer against Facebook and Instagram;
- Winning complete summary judgment for OpenAI in a trademark dispute preserving the “OpenAI” mark;
- Winning four consecutive preliminary injunction rulings for Applied Systems across three actions and two jurisdictions;
- Obtaining a complete defense verdict for Symantec in a patent case seeking more than $1 billion; and
- Obtaining an International Trade Commission victory for Varian Medical in global patent litigation concerning cancer-radiotherapy technology.
A consistent thread in Sam’s work is translating complex technology into a clear and compelling case—and helping clients protect the critical inventions, data, relationships, and competitive advantages on which their businesses depend.
Lawdragon has named Sam one of the 500 Leading Litigators in America (five years running) and one of its 100 Leading AI & Legal Tech Advisors (three years running).
- OpenAI
- Palo Alto Networks
- Varian Medical Systems
- Mazor Robotics
- Substrate
- Salesforce
- ByteDance
- The Biological Computing Company
- Vizgen
- Ansa Biotechnologies
- Genentech
- Y-Trap
- Secured a jury verdict against Meta (then Facebook) in the Western District of Texas awarding $174.5 million and a running royalty for Voxer. The weeklong trial ended in a unanimous verdict that Facebook and Instagram Live used two Voxer patents related to Voxer's Live Messaging and Store-and-Stream technologies. The jury deliberated for just 2.5 hours, found all six asserted claims across the two patents infringed, affirmed patent validity, and awarded running royalties in addition to the damages award. The two Voxer patents expire in 2028.
- Won four straight preliminary injunction victories in five months for Applied Systems, acting offensively and defensively across three actions in two jurisdictions, and subsequently defeated Comulate's motion for reconsideration and motion to stay pending appeal. The victories — including the defeat of a high-stakes antitrust monopolization theory, an offensive injunction won using the opponent's own CEO's admissions, and a finding that the opponent's harm was self-inflicted after it created a fictitious company to fraudulently access Applied's platform — put the client in a commanding position as the litigation continues.
- Secured complete summary judgment for OpenAI in the Northern District of California in a trademark dispute with Guy Ravine and Open Artificial Intelligence Inc. Ravine claimed prior rights in “Open AI” based on a 2015 domain purchase, but had not used the alleged mark in commerce until launching a competing image generator in 2022. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers held that OpenAI’s “OpenAI” mark had acquired secondary meaning by that time, giving OpenAI senior trademark rights. The decision confirms that mere domain ownership does not confer trademark priority when another company has built strong and widely recognized brand rights in the interim.
- Represented Varian Medical Systems in a global patent litigation dispute against its primary competitor Elekta involving numerous patents on cancer treatment technologies across numerous jurisdictions including the International Trade Commission, District of Delaware, Northern District of California, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Obtained a favorable settlement for Varian, after an ITC victory on behalf of Varian in which Elekta was found to infringe multiple, valid patents owned by Varian.
- Represented Symantec as trial counsel in a patent action filed by Finjan in the District of Delaware involving two patents relating to network security and antivirus software. Finjan was seeking over $1 billion in past damages and running royalties against most of Symantec’s antivirus offerings. Following a three-week jury trial, obtained a complete defense verdict, with a finding of non-infringement and invalidity for all asserted claims. Finjan had previously prevailed on the same patents in the same venue against another defendant.
- Represented Samsung in global litigation against Huawei involving twenty-two 3G/UMTS and 4G/LTE standard-essential patents, competing FRAND defenses and claims, and a Samsung antitrust counterclaim based on attempted monopolization. Obtained an anti-suit injunction in the Northern District of California halting Huawei's parallel litigation in China — a rare and significant remedy in cross-border SEP disputes — securing leverage that drove a favorable resolution.
- Represented Twitter, Salesforce, and LinkedIn in a patent litigation brought by Coho in the Northern District of California involving software for distributed processing of large data sets. The Court granted our motion for judgment on the pleadings finding the patents-in-suit invalid for failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
- Represented Salesforce, Zendesk, Riot Games, and NetSuite in patent infringement actions in the Eastern District of Texas involving application distribution and cloud computing related technologies filed by Uniloc. Obtained settlements on favorable terms after successful motion to dismiss claims as patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
- Secured a complete dismissal for Ledman Optoelectronic Co. Ltd. in ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1114, a patent infringement proceeding targeting 44 respondents over modular LED display systems used in stadiums, billboards, and commercial displays worldwide. Developed a case-dispositive strategy around inequitable conduct and improper inventorship — defenses unique to Ledman among all respondents — obtained critical third-party document production exposing fatal flaws in the complainant's inventorship narrative, and moved to compel email discovery the complainant had withheld. Rather than face the evidentiary hearing, the complainant terminated the investigation entirely, ending the case eight months after filing.
- Secured only the second writ of mandamus ever to be issued by the Federal Circuit in the seminal In re Genentech case in relation to a motion to transfer venue from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California. Later won summary judgment of non-infringement on all claims of two patents asserted by Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland against two highly successful anti-cancer products. The Federal Circuit affirmed.
- Patent Litigation
- Trade Secret Litigation
- Litigation Representing Plaintiffs
- Domestic U.S. Arbitration
- Life Sciences Litigation
- Data Privacy & Security
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence Data Center Disputes
- International Trade Commission Proceedings
- International Arbitration
- Copyright Litigation
- Antitrust & Competition
- Georgetown Law
(J.D., honors, 2008) - Harvard University
(B.A., honors, 2003)
- The State Bar of California
- United States Court of Appeals:
- Ninth Circuit
- Federal Circuit
- United States District Court:
- Northern District of California
- Central District of California
- Western District of Texas
- Recognized by Lawdragon as one of the 500 Leading Global IP Lawyers for IP, Litigation, Patent, AI, 2025
- Recognized by Lawdragon as one of the 500 Leading Litigators in America (2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026)
- Recognized by Lawdragon as one of 100 Leading AI and Legal Tech Advisors (2024, 2025, and 2026)