Clayton Thompson focuses on representing clients in intellectual property disputes involving complex computer and electronic technologies. Clayton is skilled in evaluating patent portfolios, crafting litigation strategy, and delivering positive outcomes. His experience includes steering the development of intellectual property portfolios, evaluating the reward and exposure related to patent assets, representing clients before the US district and appellate courts, and negotiating settlement and license agreements. Clayton has been involved in many of the largest patent disputes involving computer technology and consumer electronics.
Clayton is a routine lecturer on various topics related to patent law. He has taught “Patent and Know How Licensing” at George Mason University as an adjunct professor. Clayton has also been named a Virginia Rising Star by Super Lawyers.
Not admitted in California.
HTC Corp. v. Apple Inc. (United States International Trade Commission and Delaware)
Represents Apple in two matters against HTC involving human computer interface technology within consumer electronic devices.
Sun Microsystems, Inc v. NetApp Inc. (Northern District of California)
Represented Sun in three separate patent infringement cases involving computer microprocessors, operating systems, file systems, and network infrastructure. Obtained favorable settlement.
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Toshiba Corp. (United States International Trade Commission and Northern District of California)
Represented Toshiba against patents asserted by Hynix resulting in an initial determination finding two patents related to semiconductor fabrication not infringed, invalid and/or unenforceable. Obtained favorable settlement.
MediaTek Inc. v. Zoran Corporation (United States International Trade Commission)
Represented Zoran against multiple patents related to optical disc technology. The case was settled after a successful result was obtained before the International Trade Commission.
Global Locate Inc. v. SiRF Technology Inc. (United States International Trade Commission)
Represented Global Locate involving the development and filing of a complaint against SiRF which ultimately resulted in a finding of infringement for six out of six asserted patents.