Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 1 of 24
`Case 5:18—md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 1 of 24
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 2 of 24
`
`J. David Hadden is a top trial lawyer who is highly sought by the world’s
`most recognized and innovative companies to help them win complex
`and high-stakes patent litigation disputes. As one of the most influential
`patent litigators in the country, he has been repeatedly ranked as a Super
`Lawyer by Northern California Super Lawyers and honored as one of the
`top 75 IP litigation attorneys in California by the Daily Journal. He is
`ranked among the leading patent litigators by IAM Patent 1000 as a
`“consummate professional” and “fantastic litigator” who “understands
`how to win.”
`
`The world’s most innovative companies seek Dave’s advice not only
`because of his strong command of the law and strategic vision, but also
`because of his unsurpassed technical expertise. He is a former National
`Science Foundation Graduate Fellow with an undergraduate degree in
`physics from Yale University and graduate work in string theory at the
`world-renowned physics department at Princeton University. He
`understands most complex technologies with ease and translates them
`to trial themes that win. He has represented companies in a variety of
`technologies including cloud computing, natural language processing,
`machine
`learning, wearable tech, medical devices, cryptography,
`telecommunications, database management and business intelligence,
`e-commerce, and software and hardware design.
`
`Dave has been winning cases for 25 years at every stage of litigation,
`from motions to dismiss through jury trials and Federal Circuit appeals
`affirming all of his district court wins. He is one of a few trial lawyers who
`successfully secured a large award of attorneys’ fees after winning
`summary judgment in a patent case. He has repeatedly shut down
`litigation campaigns by non-practicing entities against customers of his
`clients.
`
`He represents clients in various jurisdictions around the country
`including in the Northern District of California, Eastern District of
`Virginia, District of Delaware, Western District of Texas and Eastern
`District of Texas. He has represented clients in Section 337 investigations
`instituted by the U.S. International Trade Commission and represented
`petitioners and patent owners in front of the Patent Trial and Appeal
`Board.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`J. David Hadden
`
`Partner, Litigation and Intellectual
`Property Groups
`
`Phone: 650.335.7684
`
`Email: dhadden@fenwick.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 3 of 24
`
`J. David Hadden
`
`Representative Clients:
`
`Partner, Litigation and Intellectual
`Property Groups
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Amazon.com
`
`Box
`
`Cryptography Research
`
`Dropbox
`
`Groupon
`
`Hewlett-Packard
`
`Informatica
`
`
`
`LinkedIn
` Motorola
` Netflix
` Twitter
` VIA Technologies
` Xilinx
` Zillow
`
`The following are some of Dave’s winning highlights:
` Winning all of his Federal Circuit appeals for clients including
`Amazon, Intel, Under Armor, Twitter and Zillow
` A summary judgment of non-infringement followed by $820,000
`in attorney’s fees for Voxer in a patent dispute with IPVX Patent
`Holdings
` A full defense jury verdict for Zillow and Adchemy in the Western
`District of North Carolina against competitor LendingTree; the
`verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s
`argument on appeal
` A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Twitter
`in a patent infringement action brought by Cooper Notification;
`the judgment affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s
`argument on appeal
` A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Groupon
`in the Middle District of Florida; the judgment was affirmed by
`the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
` A full defense jury verdict in Delaware for his client Amazon; the
`verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s
`argument on appeal
` A winning jury verdict and a $25 million jury award for his client
`Informatica in its patent suit against Business Objects
`
`Dave received his J.D. from Yale Law School in 1994. He received his M.A.
`from Princeton in 1987. He received his B.S. in physics from Yale
`University in 1986. Dave is a member of the State Bar of California and is
`admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and the
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 4 of 24
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Following law school
`graduation, he was a law clerk for the Honorable Walter J. Cummings,
`United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 5 of 24
`
`lawyer and a top-ranked practitioner
`is a trial
`Saina Shamilov
`representing the world’s leading technology companies in high-stakes
`patent litigation disputes. With nearly 20 years of experience in all
`aspects of pre-trial, trial and appellate practice, she has been recognized
`by peers and clients as one of the best to help resolve patent litigation
`disputes in the least painful but most favorable way for her clients. IAM
`1000 has recognized her as a leading patent litigator who is “a trusted
`partner all around,” “quick to understand complex technology” and
`“terrific at discovery.” Northern California Super Lawyers has repeatedly
`recognized Saina as a leader in her field, while the Silicon Valley Business
`Journal has named her one of Silicon Valley’s most influential women.
`Among her other recognitions, the Bar Association of San Francisco’s
`Justice & Diversity Center named her an Outstanding Volunteer for her
`pro bono work.
`
`Saina has successfully represented clients in various technological fields,
`including AI, cloud computing, machine learning, natural language
`processing, gaming, networking and telecommunications, e-commerce
`and
`internet-related
`technologies, CRM systems and database
`management, and in various jurisdictions around the country, including
`the Northern District of California, Eastern District of Virginia, District of
`Delaware, Western District of Texas and Eastern District of Texas. She
`has also represented clients in Section 337 investigations instituted by
`the U.S. International Trade Commission and has extensive experience
`representing petitioners and patent owners in front of the Patent Trial
`and Appeal Board. She was recognized by the PTAB Bar Association as
`one of the Top 50 Women in PTAB Trials.
`
`What sets Saina apart from her peers is her time spent as a software
`engineer prior to attending law school. Her technical background allows
`her to effectively understand her clients’ technologies and translate
`difficult technical issues into arguments that are understandable and
`compelling to the judge or jury. She has secured winning jury verdicts,
`obtained dismissals of numerous cases on early motions with minimal
`incurred costs, successfully transferred disputes against her clients to
`more convenient and favorable jurisdictions and secured winning
`appellate decisions in complex high-stakes patent litigation disputes for
`the world’s most recognized companies.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`Saina S. Shamilov
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 650.335.7694
`
`Email: sshamilov@fenwick.com
`
`
`Emphasis:
`Patent Litigation
`
`Trade Secret Litigation
`Inter Partes Reviews
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 6 of 24
`
`
`Saina S. Shamilov
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`
`Representative Clients:
` Amazon.com
` Groupon
`
`
`LinkedIn
`
` Netflix
` Twitch
` Zillow
`
`Saina is a member of the State Bar of California and is registered to
`practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. She received her
`J.D. from Santa Clara University School of Law, where she received a High
`Tech Law Certificate. She received her B.S. in computer science from the
`University of California, Davis. She is fluent in Russian.
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 7 of 24
`
`Melanie Mayer focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation.
`She also prepares and prosecutes patent applications, analyzes patent
`issues for various due diligence matters, advises on freedom to operate
`issues, and provides non-infringement and validity opinions, including
`opinions for Paragraph IV certifications.
`
`
`
`Melanie has represented clients in litigations involving a range of
`technological fields, particularly in biotechnology, including polymers,
`polypeptide variants, nucleotide analogs and chemical compounds.
`Melanie has a strong record of success at trial.
`
`Melanie received her J.D. from the University of Washington in 2005 and
`her Ph.D. in molecular biology and genetics from The John Hopkins
`School of Medicine in 2001. She graduated summa cum laude with a B.S.
`in biochemistry from Alma College in 1994.
`
`Prior to joining Fenwick & West, Melanie was an associate with Darby &
`Darby P.C. in Seattle. Prior to that she worked as a legal intern for Rosetta
`Inpharmatics, a subsidiary of Merck and Co., Inc. Melanie has many years
`of scientific research experience and has published numerous articles in
`her field of expertise.
`
`Melanie is a member of the State Bar of Washington.
`
`Recent Legal Publications and Presentations:
` “Update on U.S. Biosimilars Litigation and Other Recent
`Developments,” BIO Intellectual Property Counsels Committee
`Conference, March 2017
` “How Corporate Engineers Derail the Patent Train,” BIO
`Intellectual Property Counsels Committee Conference, March
`2016
` “Fenwick & West’s Patent Law Year in Review,” January 2016
` “U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Post-Patent Expiration
`Royalties,” Fenwick & West LLP, September 2015 (co-author)
` “Navigating § 101: Patentable Subject Matter,” April 2013
` “Reverse Payment Agreements,” April 2013
` “IP Litigation Alert: U.S. Supreme Court to Weigh In on Reverse
`Payment Deals,” Fenwick & West LLP, April 2013 (co-author)
` “Final Patent Rules Provide Few Surprises,” Fenwick & West LLP,
`August 2012 (co-author)
`
`
`Melanie L. Mayer, Ph.D.
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 206.389.4569
`
`Email: mmayer@fenwick.com
`
`Emphasis:
`
`Intellectual Property Litigation
`
`Patent Prosecution
`
`Intellectual Property Due Diligence
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 8 of 24
`
`Melanie L. Mayer, Ph.D.
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`
`
`
`
` “Litigation Alert: PTO Publishes Final Rules for Contested Patent
`Cases,” Fenwick & West LLP, August 2012 (co-author)
`
`Scientific Publications:
` “Identification of protein complexes required for efficient sister
`chromatid cohesion,” Mol. Biol. Cell., 2004 (co-author).
` “Identification of RFC (Ctf18p, Ctf8p, Dcc1p): an alternative RFC
`complex required for sister chromatic cohesion in S. cerevisiae,”
`Mol. Cell, 2001 (co-author)
` “Protein networks – built by association,” Nature Biotechnology,
`2000 (co-author)
` “Herpesvirus saimiri encodes a functional homolog of the
`human bcl-2 oncogene,” J. Virol, 1997
` “Exploiting the complete yeast genome sequence,” Current
`Opinion in Genetics & Development, 1996 (co-author)
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 9 of 24
`
`Todd practices complex commercial and intellectual property litigation
`at the trial and appellate levels.
`
`Todd has a deep background in a variety of related areas, allowing him
`to issue-spot creatively and develop winning arguments for clients. He
`has represented clients—ranging from startups to some of the largest
`technology companies in the world—in patent, trade secret, copyright,
`trademark, false advertising, antitrust and unfair competition matters.
`He also counsels clients on issues relating to advertising and anonymous
`speech on the internet.
`
`
`
`Todd regularly represents parties and amici on appeal, and enjoys
`helping those clients defend favorable results and upend unfavorable
`ones while also staying aligned with their longer-term interests. He has
`argued six cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,
`and worked on the mandamus petition that established the leading U.S.
`Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit precedent for what counts as a
`“regular and established place of business” under the patent venue
`statute.
`
`Todd is passionate about pro bono work and has consistently made time
`through the course of his career to give back to the community. He has
`coordinated the firm’s relationship with the Ninth Circuit pro bono
`program since 2006. Since then, Fenwick has taken on nearly 30 pro
`bono appeals, leading to published opinions on the Fourth Amendment,
`due process and asylum. Todd’s other pro bono work has included
`securing legal immigration status for a young girl who emigrated from El
`Salvador to the U.S. after a gang murdered a family member, and
`securing a rare preliminary injunction forcing the California Department
`of Corrections to provide an inmate with a medically necessary diet.
`
`Todd previously served as a law clerk to the Honorable W. James Ware
`of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Northern
`California Super Lawyers named him a “Rising Star” every year since
`2013.
`
`Todd received his J.D., cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law
`School in 2004. He received his B.A. in government from Cornell
`University in 2001.
`
`Todd is admitted to practice in California.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`Todd R. Gregorian
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 415.875.2402
`
`Email: tgregorian@fenwick.com
`
`Emphasis:
`
`Complex Commercial Litigation
`
`Intellectual Property Litigation
`Appeals
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 10 of 24
`
`Todd R. Gregorian
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`Representative Matters:
` Perfect 10 v. Giganews. Prevailed on summary judgment for
`Usenet service provider against copyright infringement claims
`based on user behavior on service and response to purported
`DMCA notices. Secured a fees award of more than $5.6 million
`with both rulings affirmed on appeal.
` Giganews v. Zada. Secured a favorable jury verdict and award of
`punitive damages in federal trial against Perfect 10 and its CEO
`for the CEO’s fraudulent transfer of money from the company.
` Openwave v. Open-Xchange. Successfully defended provider of
`web-based email services to telecoms from grab-bag of non-
`patent IP claims asserted by a competitor. Argued and secured
`summary judgment on all asserted trade secret claims.
` Tripwire v. UpGuard. Defended a startup client in a patent
`infringement and trade secret misappropriation case brought by
`its competitor.
` eMarker v. Caesars. Successfully defended Caesars in multiple
`jurisdictions against trade secret claims brought by a
`prospective vendor.
` TomTom v. Broadcom. Represented GPS navigation technology
`company TomTom in a multi-million-dollar breach of warranty
`case against chip maker Broadcom.
` Sugar Hill Music v. CBS Interactive. Defended CBS against
`indirect infringement claims from individual artists regarding
`reviews of P2P file-sharing software on the CNET website,
`ending in plaintiffs’ voluntary dismissal of claims following
`adverse discovery rulings.
` Groupion v. Groupon. Pursued cybersquatting counterclaims
`against CRM software company to successful settlement
`following dismissal of all trademark infringement claims against
`client Groupon.
` National Products v. Gamber Johnson. Key member of trial team
`that obtained a favorable jury verdict, affirmed on appeal to the
`Ninth Circuit, in a Lanham Act false advertising case in the
`Western District of Washington.
` Pineida v. Lee. Led team that secured a rare preliminary
`injunction forcing the California Department of Corrections and
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 11 of 24
`
`Todd R. Gregorian
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`Rehabilitation to provide an inmate with a medically necessary
`diet. Todd and the team were recognized for this case with the
`2015 Outstanding Volunteer award from The Justice & Diversity
`Center of The Bar Association of San Francisco.
`
`Appeals
` San Francisco Herring Association v. U.S. Department of the
`Interior. Successfully represented San Francisco Herring
`Association in a Ninth Circuit appeal related to its 2013 suit
`under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which challenged
`the authority of the National Park Service (NPS) to prohibit
`commercial herring fishing in the waters of the Golden Gate
`National Recreation Area. On December 31, 2019, the court
`affirmed that a series of warnings issued by the NPS, culminating
`in direct threats of enforcement, sufficed to constitute "final
`agency action" for purposes of the APA.
`
`
`
`In re Cray. Appellate counsel to Cray in its successful mandamus
`petition to the Federal Circuit resulting in a landmark decision
`on venue in patent cases. (Bloomberg reporter: “Cray threw a
`veritable sonic boom at Raytheon in its reply…”; IPWatchdog on
`the result: “Ordinarily these types of decisions do not make for
`successful mandamus petitions.”)
` Virginia
`Innovation Sciences v. Amazon.com. Secured
`affirmance of the district court’s invalidation of eight patents on
`Section 101 grounds. Law360 recognized the appellate win in its
`“Legal Lions and Lambs” feature.
` LendingTree v. Zillow. Defended a
`jury verdict of non-
`infringement and invalidity for improper inventorship at the
`Federal Circuit on behalf of client Zillow, and secured reversal of
`the district court’s denial of summary judgment on grounds of
`Section 101 invalidity.
` Affinity Labs of Texas v. Amazon.com. Secured affirmance at the
`Federal Circuit of the district court’s dismissal of patent
`infringement claims on grounds of Section 101 invalidity.
` Garcia v. Google. Filed an amicus brief on behalf of 11 major
`internet companies supporting reversal of an injunction that
`required removal of a controversial video from YouTube.
` Marilley v. Bonham. Appellate counsel in a case involving a U.S.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 12 of 24
`
`Todd R. Gregorian
`
`Partner, Litigation Group
`
`
`Constitution Privileges and Immunities Clause challenge to
`California commercial fishing license fees, which charged out-of-
`state residents multiples of the amounts it charged residents.
` McGary v. Culpepper. Briefed and argued Ninth Circuit appeals
`that secured a reversal of the district court’s dismissal of a
`plaintiff’s Section 1983 action for mistreatment by the State of
`Washington during his civil commitment.
` Barela v. City of Woodland. Briefed and argued a Ninth Circuit
`appeal that secured reversal of the district court’s dismissal of a
`complaint for false arrest in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
`
`Publications and Presentations:
` “Top 10 Reasons Startups Get Sued,” Create33, May 2019
` “Defending Your Anonymous Users,” Amazon Legal University,
`October 2018
` “Developments in Patent Venue,” Amazon Legal University,
`October 2018
` “Avoiding and Managing M&A Disputes,” Western M&A/Private
`Equity Forum, Daily Journal, September 15, 2016 (panelist)
` “Whither Copyright Injunctions in the Post-Garcia World?,”
`Media Law Resource Center Media Law Letter, May 2015 (co-
`author)
` “9th Circ. Weighs in on Player Likenesses in Video Games,”
`Law360, August 2013 (co-author)
` “Uniloc v. Microsoft: Federal Circuit Rules on Reasonable
`Royalty Damages Issues,” Fenwick & West, May 2011
` “Patent Law Year in Review: A Look Back at 2010 and a Look
`Ahead at 2011,” Fenwick & West, January 2011 (co-author)
` “Company Directors Can Be Liable
`for Trade Secret
`Misappropriation,” Electronic Commerce & Law Report, May
`2010 (co-author). Reprinted in VC Experts, July 2010
` “Data Wrangling, Lassoing, and Roping at the M&A Corral,”
`California Lawyers Association Business Law News, July 2008
`(co-author). Reprinted in The M&A Lawyer, October 2008; VC
`Experts Inc.’s Encyclopedia of Private Equity and Venture Capital,
`May 2009
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 13 of 24
`
` “Secrets Easily Leaked by Friend or Foe in Publicly Filed .pdf
`Documents,” Thomson/West E-Commerce Law Report (co-
`author).
`Expanded
`version
`in
`Cyberspace
`Lawyer,
`January/February 2008
` “Exposing Redaction,” Daily Journal, October 2007 (co-author)
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 14 of 24
`
`Ravi Ranganath focuses his practice on a broad variety of litigation and
`patent litigation matters to support clients in the high technology and
`life science industries. Ravi has experience with all aspects of litigation,
`including summary judgment, trial, and appeal. He has represented
`clients in jurisdictions throughout the country, including the Northern
`District of California, Eastern District of Texas, Western District of Texas,
`District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United
`States International Trade Commission. In 2017, Ravi served as a law
`clerk to the Honorable Jon S. Tigar of the Northern District of California.
`In 2019, Ravi was named a Rising Star in Northern California by Super
`Lawyers.
`
`Ravi works to provide clients with strategies for early dispute resolution.
`For example, in Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al.
`(W.D. Tex.), Ravi represented Amazon and helped secure judgment of
`patent invalidity for failure to claim eligible subject matter under 35
`U.S.C. § 101. By winning judgment on the pleadings, Amazon was able to
`avoid costly discovery and an accelerated case schedule typical in that
`district.
`
`Ravi has extensive trial experience working as part of teams that secured
`favorable judgments for their clients. In 2014, Ravi was part of a trial
`team in LendingTree, LLC v. Zillow, Inc., et al. that successfully secured a
`defense verdict for defendants Zillow and Adchemy in the Western
`District of North Carolina against competitor LendingTree. After a five-
`week trial, the jury found that Zillow and Adchemy did not infringe the
`asserted patents and the patents were invalid.
`
`In 2011, Ravi was part of a trial team representing a Korean
`manufacturer of finger print detection devices in an investigation
`pending before the International Trade Commission, In the Matter of
`Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, U.S.I.T.C. Inv. No. 337-TA-720. Ravi
`helped prepare extensive pre- and post-trial briefing and several rounds
`of briefing before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
`Circuit. The matter is widely recognized for raising novel issues relating
`to the scope of the ITC’s authority to issue exclusion orders where the
`underlying violation was based on a finding of induced infringement. The
`issue was eventually decided by a 6-4 vote of the Federal Circuit sitting
`en banc.
`
`Ravi also has considerable experience in drafting winning appellate
`briefs. In the Affinity Labs v. Amazon matter, Ravi took a leading role in
`preparing the responsive appeal brief, which led to the Federal Circuit
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`Ravi R. Ranganath
`
`Associate, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 650.335.7614
`
`Email: rranganath@fenwick.com
`
`Emphasis:
`
`Patent Litigation
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 15 of 24
`
`Ravi R. Ranganath
`
`Associate, Litigation Group
`
`
`
`
`affirming the district court’s judgment on the pleadings of Section 101
`invalidity in a precedential opinion. In the LendingTree v. Zillow matter,
`Ravi helped prepare Zillow’s briefing in the appeal following Zillow’s
`complete victory in a jury trial in the Western District of North Carolina.
`The Federal Circuit not only affirmed the jury’s verdict of non-
`infringement and
`invalidity of the asserted claims for
`improper
`inventorship, but in response to Zillow’s cross appeal, found the asserted
`claims to be patent-ineligible under Section 101.
`
`Ravi has also taken on several pro bono matters. In one such matter,
`Pineida v. Lee, et al. (N.D. Cal.), Ravi was part of a team that helped
`secure a preliminary injunction forcing the California Department of
`Corrections and Rehabilitation to provide an inmate a medically
`necessary diet. Ravi was recognized for his contributions on this case
`with the 2015 Outstanding Volunteer award from the Justice and
`Diversity Center of the Bar Association of San Francisco.
`
`Ravi received his J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of
`California, Hastings College of the Law in 2010, where he served as a
`Notes Editor of the Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly, and a member
`of the Hastings Moot Court team. While at Hastings, Ravi was also a
`member of the Thurston Society and the Order of the Coif, both
`academic honor societies. While attending law school, Ravi served as an
`extern for the Honorable Judge Charles R. Breyer of the U.S. District
`Court for the Northern District of California and as a legal intern for Cisco
`Systems. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa, with a B.A. degree in economics,
`with high honors, and a B.S. degree in business administration, with high
`distinction in general scholarship, from the University of California,
`Berkeley in 2003.
`
`Prior to law school, Ravi was a senior analyst at Cornerstone Research, a
`litigation consulting firm.
`
`Ravi is a member of the State Bar of California, and is admitted to
`practice in all District Courts in California, the Eastern District of Texas,
`and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 16 of 24
`
`Allen Wang focuses his practice on litigation matters, with an emphasis
`on patent litigation, for clients in the technology and life sciences
`industries. Allen has significant experience litigating complex intellectual
`property disputes, including representing clients in proceedings before
`the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
`
`
`
`Prior to joining Fenwick & West, Allen was an associate at a prominent
`international law firm, where he represented clients in a range of
`intellectual property litigation and counseling matters. Before becoming
`an attorney, Allen was a software developer, first with Oracle USA, and
`later with Compiere, an open-source enterprise resource planning (ERP)
`and customer relationship management (CRM) platform provider.
`
`Allen received his J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, School
`of Law, in 2011. During law school, Allen was an extern to the Honorable
`Lucy H. Koh of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
`California. He received his M.Eng. in computer science in 2002 and his
`B.S., magna cum laude, in computer science in 2001, both from Cornell
`University.
`
`Allen is admitted to practice in California. He is also registered to practice
`before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
`
`
`Allen Wang
`
`Associate, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 650.335.7288
`
`Email: allen.wang@fenwick.com
`
`Emphasis:
`
`Patent Litigation
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 17 of 24
`
`Elizabeth Hagan focuses her practice primarily on patent litigation
`matters to support clients in the pharmaceutical, life sciences and
`technology industries. Her experience includes dispute resolution in
`federal district and appellate courts, as well as in arbitration. Liz also
`represents clients in inter partes review proceedings before the USPTO’s
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and has an active pro bono practice,
`obtaining protection orders for victims of domestic violence.
`
`Before attending law school, Liz earned her Ph.D. in medical science from
`the Pathiobiology Graduate Program at Brown University. She conducted
`graduate and post-graduate research in cell and molecular biology.
`During law school, she was an intellectual property management intern
`for the University of Washington Center for Commercialization, and
`counseled small business clients on IP strategy as a member of the
`Entrepreneurial Law Clinic.
`
`Liz earned her J.D. from the University of Washington School of Law. She
`received her B.S. in biological sciences from Wellesley College.
`
`Liz is a member of the State Bar of Washington, and is admitted to
`practice in the Western District of Washington, the Eastern District of
`Texas, and the Courts of Appeals for the Federal and Ninth Circuits.
`
`Publications:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“Foreign Lost Profits Recoverable for Patent Damages,” IP
`Strategist, August 2018
`
`for Divided Patent
`Liability
`“Federal Circuit Expands
`Infringement,” IP Strategist, September 2015 (co-author)
`
`“XPA Impacts Formation But Not Proteasome-Sensitive Repair of
`DNA-Protein Cross-links Induced by Chromate,” Mutagenesis,
`2010 (co-author)
`
`“Mechanism of DNA-Protein Crosslinking by Chromium,”
`Chemical Research in Toxology, 2010 (co-author)
`
`“WRN Helicase Promotes Repair of DNA Double-Strand Breaks
`Caused by Aberrant Mismatch Repair of Chromium-DNA
`Adducts,” Cell Cycle, 2009 (co-author)
`
`“Do Not Cross Your DNA,” Chemical Research in Toxology, 2008
`(co-author)
`
`Presentations:
`
`
`
`
`Elizabeth B. Hagan, Ph.D.
`
`Associate, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 206.389.4587
`
`Email: ehagan@fenwick.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 18 of 24
`
` Patent Law Year in Review 2014, Seattle, WA (co-presenter)
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 19 of 24
`
`Shannon Turner focuses her practice on litigation and regularly counsels
`and represents technology clients on a variety of trade secret,
`trademark, patent, copyright and complex commercial disputes. She has
`litigated cases in venues across the country, including in federal and
`state courts, arbitration and the International Trade Commission.
`
`Shannon has successfully represented clients in all aspects of litigation,
`including summary judgment, trial and appeal. She recently represented
`startup CNEX Labs in a bet-the-company case brought by Huawei
`Technologies and Futurewei Technologies. Following a three-week jury
`trial in the Eastern District of Texas, the jury returned a favorable verdict
`on all claims of trade secret misappropriation, CFAA, RICO and tortious
`interference, and found that Huawei misappropriated trade secrets
`related to SSD controller technology.
`
`Prior to joining Fenwick & West, Shannon was an associate in the
`litigation group of a leading international law firm.
`
`Shannon received her J.D., cum laude, from Fordham University School
`of Law in 2013. While attending law school, Shannon was an editor for
`the Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal and was
`the recipient of an honorable mention for Best Oralist at the Willem C.
`Vis (East) International Commercial Arbitration Moot in Hong Kong.
`Shannon received her B.S. in television, radio & film from the S.I.
`Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University.
`
`Shannon is a member of the State Bars of California and New York.
`
`
`
`
`Shannon E. Turner
`
`Associate, Litigation Group
`
`Phone: 650.335.7844
`
`Email: sturner@fenwick.com
`
`Emphasis:
`
`Commercial Litigation
`
`Copyright Litigation
`
`Electronic Information
`Management
`
`Patent Litigation
`
`Trademark Litigation
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FENWICK & WEST
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 592-2 Filed 03/20/20 Page 20 of 24
`
`Chieh Tung litigates intellectual property and commercial cases for
`clients in the technology and life sciences industries. She has extensive
`experience in complex multidistrict litigation, copyright, trademark, class
`actio