Bradley W. Caldwell - Caldwell Cassady & Curry

Bradley W. Caldwell

Listed in Best Lawyers since 2016

Brad Caldwell is a principal at Caldwell Cassady & Curry in Dallas. He is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on patent infringement and complex commercial litigation for both plaintiffs and defendants. Brad’s successful track record before judges, juries and arbitration panels includes work in the fields of digital media, telecommunications and computer networking, data security, computer imaging, medical devices, enterprise software, banking technology, and oilfield services.

Brad’s litigation success for clients includes some of the largest jury verdicts in U.S. history. His recent courtroom wins as lead counsel include helping VirnetX Inc. win a $625 million patent infringement verdict in February 2016 and Texas-based Smartflash LLC win a $533 million patent infringement verdict in February 2015.  Both were against technology giant Apple Inc. and tried in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler. Days after the Smartflash verdict, Mr. Caldwell successfully represented another client in an inter partes review (IPR) trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Also in 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a $15 million patent infringement verdict won by Brad and co-counsel from Dallas’ McKool Smith in favor of Texas-based Summit 6 LLC. The jury trial against consumer electronics powerhouse Samsung Electronics Co. was heard in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Previously honored on the annual Texas Super Lawyers list of the state’s top attorneys, Brad and his fellow lawyers at Caldwell Cassady & Curry were honored in the 2015 Elite Trial Lawyers list published by The National Law Journal.

Prior to forming Caldwell Cassady & Curry in 2013, Brad was a principal at McKool Smith in Dallas. He earned the Dean’s Achievement Award in Patent Litigation at the University of Texas School of Law. Before attending law school, Brad earned a degree in electrical engineering from Texas A&M University, where he now serves as a member of the electrical engineering department’s External Advisory & Development Counsel. During an externship from Texas A&M, Brad worked for a year as an electrical engineer at the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Virginia. While working for the CIA, he obtained a Top Secret security clearance and was awarded multiple merit-based citations.


Additional Information

Practice Focus — Brad focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and complex commercial litigation.
Texas A&M UniversityBS 2000University of Texas Law SchoolJ.D. 2003

Case History

Smartflash LLC matter against Apple, Samsung, HTC, Google and Amazon

Lead trial lawyer for Smartflash in its patent infringement actions involving Smartflash’s data storage and access system patents, which are alleged to be infringed by various devices and functionality involved in the operation of Apple’s iTunes Store and App Store, Google Play, and the Amazon Appstore. In February 2015, following the first trial in these matters, a jury found that Apple willfully infringed Smartflash’s patents with its iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch products after finding that the patents were not invalid. The jury awarded Smartflash $532.9 million compensatory damages. The trial court later upheld the liability finding and set aside the damages amount. The case is under appeal.

VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Lead trial counsel for VirnetX in ongoing litigation against Apple regarding Apple’s infringement of VirnetX’s network security patents through Apple’s Facetime, iMessage, and VPN on Demand features. Brad and others originally tried the issue of infringement by Facetime and VPN on Demand to a jury in 2012, and the jury concluded that the patents were valid and infringed before awarding VirnetX $368.2 million in damages. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that Apple infringed VirnetX patents and that the patents remain valid. The case has been remanded to the district court for further proceedings on infringement and damages.

The subsequent retrial in 2016 resulted in a verdict for $625 million in favor of Mr. Caldwell's client, VirnetX.
Dr. Robert Morley v. Square Inc.

Representation of Washington University in St. Louis Professor Robert Morley in his claims against Square, Inc., Jack Dorsey, and Jim McKelvey for patent infringement and breach of fiduciary duty, misappropriation of trade secrets, exclusion of Dr. Morley from Square, and related business torts after Dr. Morley invented the famous Square credit card reader and helped create the company. Brad also represents Dr. Morley in related inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The court case is pending in the Eastern District of Missouri and is set for trial in 2016.

VirnetX Inc. v. Microsoft Inc.

Trial counsel for VirnetX in two patent infringement actions against Microsoft involving VirnetX’s network security patents. Brad and the others on the team inherited the first Microsoft case from another law firm after the close of discovery and with relatively little time to prepare for trial, but they were nevertheless successful. The jury found Microsoft willfully infringed the VirnetX patents and determined that the patents were valid before awarding $105.8 million in favor of VirnetX. The case then settled while VirnetX’s request for a permanent injunction was pending. In a subsequent matter involving additional allegations of infringement by Microsoft, Microsoft settled with VirnetX before trial.

Summit 6 LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Facebook Inc., et al.

Ongoing representation of Summit 6 in a patent infringement action involving patents that cover the processing (e.g., compression or resizing) of images prior to transmission. Facebook, Blackberry, and Photobucket settled before trial. Samsung did not, and the dispute went to trial. In early 2013, a jury found in favor of Summit 6 on infringement and validity and awarded $15 million as compensation for Samsung’s infringement. The district court’s judgment was affirmed by the Federal Circuit in September 2015.

Medtronic Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corp.

Successful representation of Medtronic while at his former firm in multiple patent infringement actions involving coronary catheterization, stent design, and drug-eluting stent technology pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and elsewhere. He helped Medtronic win a $250 million patent infringement verdict against Boston Scientific. The lawsuit settled after judgment was entered by the district court.

Wyeth and Cordis Corp. v. Medtronic Inc., et al.

Successful defense of Medtronic in a patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey while at his former firm. Local companies Wyeth and Cordis accused Medtronic of infringing patents pertaining to the use of the drug rapamycin (now commercially known as sirolimus) to treat restenosis—re-narrowing of an artery following an angioplasty procedure. The district court granted Medtronic’s motion for summary judgment, which invalidated the asserted patents and resulted in a complete victory.

Halliburton Energy Services Inc. v. BJ Services Corp.

Successful representation of Halliburton in an arbitration proceeding against BJ Services Corporation (now a part of Baker Hughes, Inc.) in a case involving the alleged infringement of three Halliburton hydraulic fracturing patents. Brad handled this case at his former firm.

i2 Technologies Inc. (now JDA Software Group) v. Oracle Corp.

Successful representation of i2 Technologies in a patent infringement action involving supply-chain planning and application-management patents while at his former firm. The parties reached a settlement agreement after the pretrial conference and before the beginning of trial.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. v. Affiliated Computer Services Inc.

Successful defense of ACS in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by JPMorgan Chase in the District of Delaware, focusing on three stored-value card patents asserted by JPMorgan. Before the close of discovery, JPMorgan unilaterally dropped all three of those patents from the lawsuit in the face of compelling noninfringement, invalidity, and inequitable conduct defenses developed by Brad and fellow counsel when he was with his former firm.

Office Location

2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000
Dallas, TX 75201
United States

Practice Areas

Litigation - Intellectual Property
Litigation - Patent

Other Information

Gender: Male