Michael G. Pattillo Jr.

Michael Pattillo is an experienced appellate litigator. He has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals, and a state supreme court. Mr. Pattillo’s practice also includes critical motions and issue analysis at the trial level.

Mr. Pattillo has extensive experience with appeals in patent cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He has won cases setting precedent on major issues of patent law, including McRO, Inc. v. Namco Bandai Games America (patent-eligibility of software under 35 U.S.C. § 101) and Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. (standard for inequitable conduct). He has successfully defended patent infringement verdicts worth hundreds of millions of dollars; won appeals of inter partes review decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; and obtained affirmance of exclusion orders issued by the International Trade Commission.

Mr. Pattillo also has experience in a wide variety of substantive areas beyond patent law, including the Federal Trade Commission Act, the False Claims Act, administrative law, securities fraud, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, campaign finance, federal preemption, the dormant Commerce Clause, and mass torts.

Mr. Pattillo is a founding partner of MoloLamken. He was previously an associate with Williams & Connolly LLP and Baker Botts LLP. Before entering private practice, Mr. Pattillo served as a law clerk to Judge Stanley F. Birch of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and to Justice Nathan L. Hecht of the Supreme Court of Texas.

Representative Matters

• AMG Capital Management v. Federal Trade Commission, 141 S. Ct. 1341 (2021): Successfully argued case concerning whether Section 13(b) of the FTC Act authorizes the Commission to seek monetary remedies; overturned $1.27 billion judgment.

• Berkeley Cty. Sch. Dist. v. Hub Int’l Ltd., No 21-1691 (4th Cir. 2022): Successfully argued appeal vacating decision denying Hub’s motion to compel arbitration under § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

• Mylan Pharms. Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., 50 F.4th 147 (Fed. Cir. 2022): Successfully defended PTAB decision rejecting Mylan’s anticipation and obviousness challenges to Merck patent claims for compounds for treating Type-2 diabetes.

• Genentech, Inc., v. Amgen, Inc., 796 F. App’x 726 (Fed. Cir. 2020): Successfully defended order denying preliminary injunction in patent suit involving the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.
• Comcast Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 951 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2020): Successfully defended ITC order excluding from importation certain set-top boxes that infringe Rovi Corp.’s patents.
• Berkeley Cty. Sch. Dist. v. Hub Int’l Ltd., 944 F.3d 225 (4th Cir. 2019): Successfully argued appeal vacating decision denying Hub’s motion to compel arbitration under § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act.
• TCL Commc’ns Holdings Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, 943 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2019): Successfully overturned, on Seventh Amendment grounds, district court’s decision that Ericsson’s rates for patents essential to 2G, 3G, and 4G mobile communications standards were not “fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory,” and imposing unfavorable rates going forward.
• Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Wyeth LLC, 792 F. App’x 813 (Fed. Cir. 2019): Succeeded in overturning PTAB decision finding that Wyeth’s patent claims for formulas for stabilizing multi-valent conjugate vaccines were not invalid as obvious.
• Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corp., 915 F.3d 788 (Fed. Cir. 2019): Succeeded in overturning case-dispositive construction of Continental Circuit’s patent claims on manufacturing multi-layer electronic devices.
• VirnetX v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 748 F. Appx 332 (Fed. Cir. 2019): Obtained summary affirmance of $440 million damages award against Apple for infringing VirnetX’s patents covering Apple’s FaceTime and VPN-on-Demand products.
• Gilead Scis., Inc. v. Merck & Co., Inc., 888 F.3d 1231 (Fed. Cir. 2018): Represented Merck in challenging decision applying the “unclean hands” doctrine to erase Merck’s $200-million patent infringement judgment against Gilead.
• Mervyn v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 882 F.3d 680 (7th Cir. 2018): Obtained affirmance of summary judgment in putative class action brought under the Motor Carrier Act’s Truth-in-Leasing regulations.
• Hasty v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017): Successfully represented federal prison warden in Supreme Court case addressing whether Bivens extends to actions undertaken by prison officials in connection with confinement of foreign nationals detained in the course of the government’s 9/11 terrorism investigation.
• McRO, Inc. v. Namco Bandai Games Am., 837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016): Succeeded in overturning district court ruling that McRO’s patents for methods for automating 3-D facial animation were not patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
• Rambus Inc. v. Rea, 527 F. App’x 902 (Fed. Cir. 2013): Successfully represented Rambus in challenging a PTO decision finding patent on DRAM technology to be invalid as anticipated.
• Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 649 F.3d 1276 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (en banc): Successfully represented Therasense in landmark en banc Federal Circuit case concerning the “inequitable conduct” doctrine.
• Represented major technology companies and trade groups as amici curiae in significant patent and technology-related cases:
  • Google, LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021)
  • Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., 579 U.S. 928 (2016)
  • Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014)
  • Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013)
  • Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., 886 F.3d 1179 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Publications

• SCOTUS Ends the FTC’s Section 13(b) Enforcement Program, The National Law Journal (May 10, 2021)
• Supreme Court Simplifies Diversity Jurisdiction and Corporate “Citizenship,” Exec. Counsel (Dec. 2010/Jan. 2011)
• When “Lesser” Is More: The Case for Reviving the Constitutional Right to a Lesser Included Offense, 77 Tex. L. Rev. 429 (1998)

News & Appearances