Duane Morris LLPPartner

Mr. John Matthew Baird

About Mr. John Matthew Baird

Mr. John Matthew Baird is a lawyer practicing intellectual property. John received a B.S. degree from Cornell University in 1998, and has been licensed for 17 years. John practices at Duane Morris LLP in Washington, DC.

Reviews for John

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

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Partner
    Firm Name
    Duane Morris LLP
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Representative Matters: Patent Trial
    Appeal Board Proceedings (Inter Partes Review): Lead counsel representing petitioner Unified Patents in IPR challenging the validity of a patent directed to remote storage systems for mobile devices. The Patent Trial
    Appeal Board agreed with our challenge
    held all claims unpatentable as obvious. Unified Patents v. SynKloud Technologies, Inter Partes Review No. 2019-01655.
    Lead counsel representing Petitioner Ruckus Wireless, Inc. in instituted IPRs challenging the validity of patents held by XR Communications, LLC that are directed to wireless beam forming techniques. Inter Partes Review Nos. 2018-01018,
    -01017. Argued final trial hearing for the two IPRs. The PTAB found all challenged claims unpatentable
    denied the patent owner's motions to amend.
    Lead counsel representing petitioners Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Cox Communications, Inc., Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC, Verizon Services Corp.
    ARRIS Group, Inc. in IPRs challenging the validity of patents held by TQ Delta, LLC. The patents are directed to phase scrambling, low power management,
    diagnostic techniques for multicarrier communications. Final written decisions found in favor of petitioners. Inter Partes Review Nos. 2017-00417, -418, 419, -420,
    -422.
    Represented petitioners ARRIS Group, Inc., Tellabs, Inc., Alcatel-Lucent USA, INc.,
    Source Photonics, Inc. in successful IPRs of three patents held by Cirrex concerning optical waveguides
    filters. In one IPR, obtained institution on all challenged claims
    early judgment in favor of petitioners. Argued the final trial hearing in the other two, both of which resulted in final written decisions in favor of petitioners on all claims. Inter Partes Review Nos. 2014-00815, -1077
    -1191.
    Represented petitioner Verizon Services Corp. in successful IPRs of three patents held by AIP that concern telephone call setup
    transmission using a callback (i.e. a reverse direction phone call) from a telecommunication switch associated with the called party. The Patent Trial
    Appeal Board instituted all IPRs
    rendered judgment in favor of petitioner on all instituted claims. Inter Partes Review Nos. 2015-01104, -1106
    -1107.
    Patent Prosecution: Prosecuted in the area of integrated circuits on behalf of one of the world's largest independent semiconductor foundries.
    Prosecuted applications for one of the largest professional engineering services firm in the world in the area of infrastructure engineering.
    Patent Litigation: Oyster Optics, LLC v. Coriant Am. Inc., et al., 2:16-cv-01302-JRG (E.D. Tex.). Represented Cisco Systems in a seven patent infringement action concerning 40G
    100G optical fiber communications equipment. Plaintiff withdrew six of the seven patents from the case after claim construction
    other victories. Secured summary judgment on a release
    related exhaustion defense for the final patent, which the Plaintiff has appealed to the Federal Circuit..
    TQ Delta LLC (D.Del.). Represent defendants Comcast, Cox, Time Warner Cable,
    Verizon. The eight patents-in-suit held by TQ Delta pertain to multicarrier DSL technology, including low power modes, diagnostics,
    phase scrambling. The patents are asserted against Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA) products
    services.
    Consolidated Work Station Computing, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.. (S.D.N.Y.) Represented defendant Cisco. The patent-in-suit held by CWSC pertains to fault-tolerant power supplies for powering clustered personal computer processors. Obtained early settlement.
    Cirrex Systems LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al. (D. Del). Represented Verizon, Tellabs
    ARRIS Group defendants as litigation counsel
    IPR counsel. The three patents-in-suit held by Cirrex concern various optical assemblies that include waveguides, thin film filters,
    masks
    are asserted against Optical Networking Terminal components in the Verizon FiOS service. Obtained stay
    then dismissal of cases after successful resolution of IPRs.
    AIP Acquisition LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al. (D. Del). Represented Verizon defendants as litigation
    IPR counsel. The five patents-in-suit are held by AIP
    concern telephone call setup procedures, including use of data networks, VoIP, least cost routing, hybrid networks,
    call hunt/simulring features. Obtained stay
    then dismissal of cases after successful resolution of IPRs.
    ReefEdge Networks, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., et al., (D. Del)
    ReefEdge Networks, LLC v. Meraki, Inc. (D. Del)

    ReefEdge Networks, LLC v. Aruba Networks, Inc. (D. Del). Represented Cisco, Meraki
    Aruba defendants. The three patents-in-suit held by ReefEdge concerned technology for seamless user mobility among WiFi access points in a wireless networking environments. Argued claim construction
    indefiniteness at Markman hearing. Case settled for all clients.
    BAE Systems Information
    Electronic Systems Integration Inc. v. Aeroflex Incorporated (D. Del.) Represented Aeroflex defendants. The patent-in-suit held by BAE Systems concerned infrared countermeasure systems that use lasers to protect aircraft from incoming missiles. Argued claim construction at Markman hearing. Obtained summary judgment in favor of Aeroflex on patent infringement claims, disposing of case prior to trial. Had earlier obtained summary judgment ruling in favor of Aeroflex disposing of patent infringement claim.
    Graywire, LLC v. Ciena Corp et. al., (N.D.Ga). Represented Cisco
    Ciena defendants. The three patents-in-suit held by Graywire (now Cirrex Systems) were directed to various optical technology, including planar lightguide circuitry, reconfigurable add-drop optical multiplexers, optical fiber identification technology,
    laser light filtration
    stabilization. Obtained stay
    then dismissal after successful resolution of patents in inter partes re-examination
    Federal Circuit appeals.
    Network Gateway Solutions, LLC v. Adtran, Inc. et al., (D. Del.). Represented defendant Cisco Systems, Inc. The patent in suit pertained to digital network access servers that connect remote computers over telephone line infrastructure. Case settled.
    Trade Secret Litigation: BAE Systems Information
    Electronic Systems Integration Inc. v. Aeroflex Incorporated (D.Del.). Represented Aeroflex defendants. The technology involved infrared countermeasure systems that used lasers to protect aircraft from incoming missiles. Obtained summary judgment in favor of Aeroflex on trade secret
    breach of contract claims.
    Ellucian, Inc. v. Lori Crockett, (Fairfax County Circuit Court, Virginia). Served as Virginia local counsel for Plaintiff, Ellucian, Inc. in bringing claims of breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets
    unfair competition.
    Design Patent Litigation: Genlyte Thomas Group LLC v. Quality Sourcing Services, Inc. (C.D.Cal.). Represented QSSI defendant. Design patent directed to lighting structure.
    International IP Litigation: ReefEdge Networks Deutschl
    GmbH v. Cisco Systems GmbH (District of Dusseldorf, Germany). Represented Cisco defendant through German counsel
    coordinated co-pending U.S. litigation. The patent-in-suit was the European Patent counterpart to patents-in-suit in co-pending United States litigation concerning technology for seamless mobility among WiFi wireless access points.
    Cisco Systems GmbH v. ReefEdge Networks Deutschl
    GmbH (Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany). With German counsel, represented plaintiff Cisco in bringing a nullity action challenging the validity of the European Patent that was the subject of a co-pending infringement action against Cisco in Germany.
    Pro Bono Matters: Negotiated trademark license with the United States Marine Corps on behalf of charitable organization that provides support for U.S. Marines
    their families.
    Represented Vietnam War veteran before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in connection with a claim for benefits for a service connected disability, resulting in a rem
    in favor of the veteran. Ruling forced Veterans Administration to properly recognize angina as a compensable form of ischemic heart disease.

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    2009, Virginia
    2013, District of Columbia
    U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
    U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
    U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
    U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
    U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    Memberships

    Professional Activities

    •American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
    •The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    George Mason University Law School
    Class of 2008
    J.D.
    cum laude
    Other Education
    Cornell University
    Class of 1998
    B.S.
    Electrical Engineering

Mr. John Matthew Baird

Partner at Duane Morris LLP
Not yet reviewed

505 9th Street, Suite 1000Washington, DC 20004U.S.A.

Show on map

Lawyers Nearby

Maurice U. Cahn
Pro
Maurice U. Cahn
5.0
Intellectual Property lawyer
Reynaldo Carlos Barceló
Pro
Reynaldo Carlos Barceló
4.9
Intellectual Property lawyer
Richard Carnell Baker, Esq.
Pro
Richard Carnell Baker, Esq.
4.4
Intellectual Property lawyer
Thomas L. McCally
Pro
Thomas L. McCally
5.0
Intellectual Property lawyer
Babak Akhlaghi
Pro
Babak Akhlaghi
5.0
Intellectual Property lawyer
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: