Litigation - Intellectual Property Litigation - Patent
Bradley W. "Brad" Caldwell
Recognized in Best Lawyers since 2016 Awarded Practice Areas
Biography
Brad Caldwell is one of the nation’s leading trial lawyers focusing on patent infringement and complex commercial litigation for plaintiffs and defendants. His successes before judges, juries, and arbitration panels include cases involving digital media, telecommunications, computer networking, semiconductors, computer chips, data security, computer imaging, medical devices, enterprise software, banking technology, and oilfield services.
Brad has been named a “Titan of the Plaintiffs Bar” by Law360 twice, most recently following a $502.8 million verdict against Apple in 2020. He has also been named “Litigator of the Week” by The American Lawyer magazine two separate times based on record-setting patent infringement verdicts against Apple. Those jury awards of $625.6 million and $302 million ranked as the nation’s 6th and 9th largest during 2016. A year earlier, he helped Smartflash LLC win a $532.9 million verdict against Apple, which was the year’s top Texas verdict, the largest intellectual property verdict nationally, and the third-largest U.S. verdict overall.
In addition to trying seven jury trials to verdict against Apple and winning them all, Brad has secured patent-infringement verdicts against Microsoft, Samsung, LG, Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Depuy Synthes, and other companies with tremendous resources to pour into litigation. Overall, these verdicts total over $3 billion against businesses Brad’s clients believed were using their patented technologies without permission.
Before starting his legal career, Brad worked for a year as an electrical engineer at the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Virginia, where he obtained a top-secret security clearance and was awarded multiple merit-based citations.
Overview
- The University of Texas, J.D., graduated 2003
- Texas, State Bar of Texas
- New York, New York State Bar
- American Board of Trial Advocates - Member
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
- U.S. Court for the Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Texas, State Bar of Texas
- New York, New York State Bar
- American Board of Trial Advocates - Member
- The University of Texas, J.D., graduated 2003
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
- U.S. Court for the Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Supreme Court
Client Testimonials
Awards & Focus
Named "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers® for:
- Litigation - Intellectual Property, Dallas/Fort Worth (2023)
Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2026 for work in:
- Litigation - Intellectual Property
- Litigation - Patent
Additional Areas of Practice:
- Corporate Law
- Mergers and Acquisitions Law
Awards:
- Best Law Firms, The Best Lawyers in America/U.S. News & World Report, 2017
- #1 U.S. Plaintiffs' Patent Firm, IAM Patent 1000-The World's Leading Patent Professionals, 2017
- Texas Intellectual Property Litigation Department of the Year, Texas Lawyer, 2017
- Rising Stars, Law360, 2017
- Best Lawyers in America, 2016-present
- Best Lawyers in Dallas, D Magazine, 2016-present
- Top 100 U.S. Verdicts (3 verdicts), The National Law Journal/VerdictSearch, 2016
- #1 Texas Intellectual Property Verdict, The National Law Journal/VerdictSearch, 2016
- Intellectual Property Trailblazer, The National Law Journal, 2016
- Texas Super Lawyers, Thomson Reuters, 2015-present
- Litigator of the Week (twice), The American Lawyer, 2016
- #1 Texas Intellectual Property Verdict, The National Law Journal/VerdictSearch, 2015
- Top 100 U.S. Verdicts , The National Law Journal/VerdictSearch, 2015
- Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America, 2014-present
- Texas Texas Rising Stars, Thomson Reuters, 2006-2009, 2011-2015
- 3rd Largest Verdict in the U.S., The National Law Journal/Verdict Search, 2015
- Leading U.S. Patent Litigator, The Legal 500, 2012
- Best Lawyers Under 40, D Magazine, 2006
- Dean’s Achievement Award in Patent Litigation, University of Texas School of Law, 2000
News & Media
Additional Information
Case History
Cases
- 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.
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.
Your browser is not fully compatible with our automatic printer friendly formatting.
Please use the print button to print this profile page.