Ross Spencer Garsson - Dickinson Wright PLLC

Ross Spencer Garsson

Listed in Best Lawyers since 2014

Ross Spencer Garsson has more than 20 years of experience practicing intellectual property and technology law. Ross focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation, patent prosecution, and intellectual property portfolio management in a variety of technology areas, including chemical, nanotechnology, semiconductor and computer technologies. Ross has litigated numerous intellectual property disputes in State and Federal District Courts, in the U.S. Court of Appeals, and at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Ross has worked closely with nanotechnologists to procure and license their technologies. His work with the Richard E. Smalley Institute for Nanoscale Science and Technology at Rice University and the Alan G. MacDiarmid Nanotech Institute at the University of Texas at Dallas has resulted in some of the most important patents for producing and manipulating carbon nanotubes.

Rice UniversityBA 1986Rice UniversityBS 1986University of Texas School of LawJ.D. 1992
Austin Rice Alliance Rice Alliance Competitions (Business, Biotechnology and Nanotechnology)The University of Texas, I2P Global and National CompetitionsAustin Gifted School (Ace Academy)Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship (Houston)

Case History

Other Court Admissions
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Areas of Concentration
  • Patent and trademark litigation
  • Prosecution (acquisition) of patents and trademarks
  • Patent interpretation towards avoidance and design-around
  • IP portfolio evaluation and management
  • IP licensing and transactions
Significant Representations
  • KLA-Tencor Corporation v. Xitronix Corporation; Civil Case No. 08-CA-723SS (W.D. Tex.). Represented Xitronix in defense of a patent infringement claim pertaining to devices for non-destructively evaluating semiconductor chips. A jury verdict was returned holding that Xitronix did not infringe the patents-in-suit, including a jury verdict that all of the asserted patent claims were invalid. During post-trial motions, the Court upheld the jury verdict in its entirety and found additional legal reasons why all patent claims were invalid. 
  • NobelBiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, L.L.C.; Civil Case No. 6:12-CV-00244-LED (E.D. Tex.).  Representing Global Connect in defense of a patent infringement suit for Global Connect’s system for broadcasting pre-recorded voice messages telephonically. 
  • CodePro Innovations v. Shell Oil Company; Civil Case No. 4:12-CV-02351 (S.D. Tex.).  Represented Save Mart Supermarkets in defense of a patent infringement suit involving a gas rewards program. 
  • Ameranth, Inc. v. ATX Innovation, Inc.; Civil Case No. 12-CV-1656 JLS (NLS).  Representing ATX Innovation (Tabbedout) in defense of a patent infringement suit directed to Tabbedout’s mobile device application for opening a tab and paying a bill at a restaurant/bar.
Part 2
  • Mass Engineered Design, Inc. v. 9X Media, Inc.; Civil Case No. 2:09-CV-358-JRG (E.D. Tex.). Represented Defendant AFC Industries in defense of a patent infringement claim pertaining to its computer monitor display systems.
  • Content Extraction and Transmission LLC v. Drivve US LLC; Civil Case No. 12-CV-1188 (ALC)(GWG) (S.D.N.Y.).  Represented Drivve US in defense of a patent infringement claim involving Drivve’s software product for office workplace productivity solutions. 
  • Visibility Corp. v. Hudson Products Corp.; Civil Case No. 1:10-cv-12279-RGS (D. Mass.). Represented Hudson Products in defense of copyright infringement/breach of contract claim for software product. 
  • Geotag, Inc. v. The Western Union Corp.; Civil Case No. 2:10-CV-00574 (E.D. Tex.). Represented Jelly Belly Candy Co. in defense of a patent infringement claim pertaining to an internet organizer for accessing graphically and topically based information.
  • Union Properties LLC v. Inc., Civil Case No. 11-CA-137-LY (W.D. Tex.). Represented Inc. in a qui tam suit alleging that falsely marked its software and a variety of label sheets with patents that do not cover these products.
  • Edo Interactive, Inc. v. BancVue, Ltd., Civil Case No. 3:11-CV-00341 (M.D. Tenn.). Represented BancVue in a patent infringement suit involving BancVue’s patented technology for methods and systems for operating a reward program through a financial institution over a network. Case settled. 
Part 3
  • Automotive Technologies Int’l, Inc. v. Siemens VDO Automotive Corporation; No. 2011-1061 (Federal Circuit). Represented ATI in an appeal of a patent infringement lawsuit pertaining to side impact sensors used in automobiles.
  • DataCom Design Group LLC v. Jaffe Holden, Inc., Cause No. 10-0618 (207th Judicial District Court of Hays County, Texas). Represented DataCom Design in a misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of contract action against prior employee and his new employer.
  • InteliFUSE Inc. v. BioMedical Enterprises, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-8093 (S.D. N.Y.). Represented BME in defense of a patent infringement suit regarding memory shaped surgical staples and devices for closing such staples. Cas
  • Alcatel USA Sourcing Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action Nos. 6:06-CV-499 and 6:06-CV-500 (E.D. Tex.). Represented Microsoft in patent infringement suits in which both parties had claims of patent infringement against one another. Claims included infringement by Alcatel of Microsoft’s patented network gateway technology.
Part 4
  • Multimedia Patent Trust v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action No. 06-CV-0684 (S.D. Cal.). Represented Microsoft in defense of a patent infringement suit regarding video compression. Jury verdict for Microsoft was obtained (no infringement). Ca
  • Zimmer v. 3N Global Inc.; Civil Case No. 1:08-CV-342 (S.D. Ohio). Represented 3N Global in defense of patent infringement claims directed to its alert notification system.
  • Certain Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Batteries, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-600) (United States Int’l Trade Commission). Represented 3M and 3M Innovative Properties in a case against Sony involving infringement of 3M’s patented lithium-ion battery cathode technology.
  • DDB Technologies, L.L.C. v. MLB Advanced Media L.P., Civil Action No. 1-04-CA-352-LY (W.D. Tex.). Represented plaintiff DDB in a patent infringement suit involving DDB’s patented technology for broadcasting live events to remote locations and producing a computer simulation of the events at those locations.

Office Location

303 Colorado Street, Suite 2050
Austin, TX 78701
United States

Practice Areas

Patent Law