×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Sheppard MullinPartner
Harris Gao

Harris Gao

Not yet reviewed

1717 Nanjing Road West, Shanghai 200040, China

Intellectual Property, IP Licensing, Technology and Commercial Transactions, Patent Litigation and 11 more

About Harris Gao

Harris Gao is a lawyer practicing intellectual property, ip licensing, technology and commercial transactions, patent litigation and 11 other areas of law. Harris received a B.S. degree from Tsinghua University in 1994, and has been licensed for 23 years. Harris practices at Sheppard Mullin.

Harris Gao (Shanghai, )

Reviews for Harris

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property 1
    • Trade Secrets
  • Litigation
  • Other 11
    • IP Licensing, Technology and Commercial Transactions
    • Patent Litigation
    • International Reach
    • China
    • Securities Litigation
    • Antitrust and Competition
    • Entertainment, Technology and Advertising
    • Life Sciences
    • Semiconductors
    • Telecom
    • CFIUS: Foreign Investment in the U.S.

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Partner
    Firm Name
    Sheppard Mullin
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Experience: Representative Experiences: Advised a number of leading h
    sets companies on various licensing
    litigation issues, particularly on the fair, reasonable
    non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing of st
    ard-essential patents (SEPs).
    Represented Fudan University in out-licensing its ex-China rights to a series of novel immuno-oncology drug c
    idates to a U.S. pharmaceutical company.
    Represented various Chinese companies, including Hanergy, Appotronics, Youzu,
    Ants Financial, in overseas acquisitions
    strategic investments to acquire critical technologies, such as in semiconductor, laser diode, photovoltaics,
    artificial intelligence.
    Represented ZTE on patent prosecution on wireless technologies,
    various patent litigation in the United States.
    Represented various Chinese companies, including Longtop
    Deer Consumer Products, that were listed in the United States in securities litigation, SEC investigations,
    regulatory compliance matters.
    Represented Shanghai Institute of Biological Science, China Academy of Science on IP
    licensing issues.
    Represented Motorola in multi-district litigation against its competitors in the mobile computer business. The technologies involved include touch screen, user interface, operating system, signature capture, wireless communication, network management, bar code decoding,
    ergonomics.
    Represented Pfizer before the Federal Circuit regarding the written description requirement for pharmaceutical inventions.

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    United States Patent and Trademark Office (Not admitted in China)
    2003, New York
  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Columbia University
    Class of 2002
    J.D.
    Other Education
    Tsinghua University
    Class of 1994
    B.S.
    Physics

    Catholic University of America
    Class of 1997
    M.S.
    Physics

Email Harris Gao

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions