Source: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/biographies/s/matthew-r-shapiro
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 00:18:53+00:00

Document:
Matthew Shapiro is an associate in the intellectual property litigation group focusing primarily on patent litigation matters across a broad range of technical fields, including computer-based technologies in the consumer electronics, industrial process management, insurance, digital printing, and internet-based service industries.
Matthew has experience with all phases of district court litigation from pre-suit investigation through appeal, including leading technical teams, developing case strategies, taking and defending depositions, managing discovery, and preparing witnesses for trial. Matthew also has considerable experience with post-grant proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, where he has served as counsel in more than fifteen proceedings. His experience further includes representation of pro bono clients in state and federal courts.
In law school, Matthew worked as a judicial extern for the Honorable Kathleen M. O’Malley, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and for the Honorable Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Matthew has an undergraduate degree in Computer Science and Engineering from the University of Connecticut ranking first in his graduating class in the school of engineering. He wrote his honors thesis on a Method for Quantitative Analysis of the Software Defect Life Cycle.
Certain Wireless Mesh Networking Products and Related Components Thereof, 337-TA-1131 (ITC): Representing Emerson Electric and Tadiran Batteries Ltd. in a Section 337 investigation brought by SIPCO LLC related to wireless mesh networking products.
Emerson Electric v. SIPCO et al. (N.D. Ga., PTAB, Fed. Cir.): Represent Emerson Electric in a 10-patent lawsuit, multiple inter partes review and covered business method proceedings and appeals therefrom relating to wireless mesh network technology.
Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited et al. (D. Del.): Represented IP Bridge at jury trial in asserting standards-essential patents related to the 4G/LTE telecommunications standard. After seven-day trial, the jury found all four asserted claims valid and infringed and awarded FRAND damages.
Activision Blizzard, Inc. et al. v. Acceleration Bay LLC (PTAB, Fed. Cir.): Represented three global computer gaming companies, including Electronic Arts and Activision Blizzard, on appeal and during the underlying inter partes review proceedings challenging three patents related to broadcasting information over computer networks.
Imperium IP Holdings (Cayman), Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex., PTAB, Fed. Cir.): Defended client as lead technical associate for one of three asserted patents during jury trial resulting in a jury finding of invalidity, and represented client through appeal of an inter partes review proceeding related to same patent, resulting in a finding of all challenged claims unpatentable.
A Leading Provider of Multimedia Control Devices (E.D. Tex.): Defended against alleged infringement of network-based lighting control products by a non-practicing entity.
A Large Japanese Automotive Manufacturer (E.D. Tex.): Defended against infringement allegations concerning LCD backlighting and LED tail light technologies by a non-practicing entity.
Shortridge v. Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Defended ADP against patent infringement allegations related to payroll reporting. Patent invalidated for claiming unpatentable subject matter under the Supreme Court’s Alice decision.
Athenahealth, Inc. v. AdvancedMD Software, Inc. (D. Mass.): Defended an Automatic Data Processing, Inc. subsidiary in patent infringement litigation involving web-based healthcare insurance claims processing.
RR Donnelley & Sons Company v. Xerox Corporation (N.D. Ill., PTAB): Asserted six RR Donnelley patents concerning variable data printing and raster image processing technologies, and defended validity of two asserted patents in an inter partes review proceeding.
A Major Commercial Insurance Company (N.D. Ohio): Defended against infringement allegations related to usage-based insurance underwriting based on vehicle telematics data, and asserted patents related to processing and quoting of insurance policies.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.